# Ouch TiVo Q4 Results



## MrSkippy53 (Jan 27, 2011)

TiVo not look very good. It's clear that with the decline in subs, (21%) people are just not willing to go the TiVo route when it's really not much cheaper than renting a HD DVR from the Cable Co. In my case I save about a buck a month by owning a TiVo (12.95 sub plus 1.50 cable card rental). TiVos are not hitting the market with features that the other boxes don't have. 

What will TiVo need to do to keep you as a customer next year?


----------



## MMaleto (Feb 12, 2011)

Lower sub prices....too much out there to be paying a monthly fee; just to record.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

A good start would be to finish the HD UI. It would also be nice if came up with a way to stream shows between boxes, rather then copy them, to work around the current copyright issues with MRV. A better UI, and desktop software, for music and photos would be cool too. (the current music & photos portions of TiVo Desktop are seriously lacking) 

Dan


----------



## ACABThomas (Jan 30, 2005)

I'd love to see Apple buy TiVo, replacing Apple TV, do a real integration with iTunes, and turn it into the one great media controller for everything. Seems like a great match, given the weaknesses of Apple TV and the strengths of TiVo.

As for keeping me as a customer, I have a PLS, so I certainly hope they don't go under.


----------



## bbydon (Feb 26, 2011)

Apple will never buy TiVo. Apple has no need for a DVR when streaming on demand is the future.


----------



## johnsom (May 30, 2001)

Enable VOD with Comcast and fix the MRV restrictions.


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

I don't know why anyone is surprised! 

Come onto this forum and read a few posts you will learn pretty quickly that TiVo is the worse possible investment. Our own user group is working as hard as we can to kill this product!

I participate in a couple of forums - windows home server and a couple of car forums, everyone is angry and all the posts are bitter. It seems to be a trend and I am not quite sure why. Just realize when someone is considering an investment of this size - they generally do a little research.

We are TiVo's best worst advocate!

Enjoy!


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

They did have an increase in new subs. The problem is too many old subs churning out. Rogers dismissed that as old SD boxes churning out, but if those boxes were being replaced with Premieres that wouldn't be an issue.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

bradleys said:


> I participate in a couple of forums - windows home server and a couple of car forums, everyone is angry and all the posts are bitter. It seems to be a trend and I am not quite sure why. Just realize when someone is considering an investment of this size - they generally do a little research.


I recently got a Palm Pre2 which I love. When I joined a forum for the device I was really surprised at how unhappy a lot of folks there are with Palm/HP. Lots to love about this device but the vocal minority are always there to turn the focus back to the shortcomings.

I think this is a growing trend in the gadget community. Everyone is spec obsessed and unless they can defend their device as the best solution against all comers they're just miserable. "Yeah, this does what I care about better than anything else" is no longer sufficient.

That situation is especially acute here at TCF. For one thing, TiVo has effectively abandoned any attempt to be a "community friendly" company. Sure, they'll still throw out a helpful comment or tweet from time to time. But TiVo has gone from a company that really showed how customer engagement on the Internet can work for a young company to a company that is nothing special in that regard.

The way this forum is run may be in part at fault for that. TCF really isn't run by TiVo fans anymore. So it's not a particularly friendly place for TiVo fans, let alone TiVo themselves. Not saying that there's no room for complaints, just that there's no effort to manage the forum to keep them from overwhelming everything else.

Then finally the biggest reason - TiVo has simply failed to deliver on the expectations that they themselves have created. Worse still, the gap is widening rather than closing. With every new feature that competitors or partners introduce that TiVo doesn't support TiVo falls further adrift of the ideal one box solution that they claim to provide. Even as someone who still finds TiVo the perfect solution as a DVR with occasional OTT video use, I can't really defend that.

Add to that the fact that this is no accident. TiVo has limited resources and they've chosen to focus them on cable partners and law suits rather than paid subscribers. That may be the best thing for the company in the long run if it pans out, but it may sink them if it doesn't.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> A good start would be to finish the HD UI. It would also be nice if came up with a way to stream shows between boxes, rather then copy them, to work around the current copyright issues with MRV. A better UI, and desktop software, for music and photos would be cool too. (the current music & photos portions of TiVo Desktop are seriously lacking)
> 
> Dan


all of that pales over the one main stumbling block. When I bought into TiVo DVRs a significant nice factor was that I could install them without even giving the cable company a thought. No upgrade to a digital tier needed and no truck roll to have some 3rd party contractor tell me a bunch of BS while sort of making things work.

Until that can happen with the digital broadcasts, TiVo has a problem - especially with SDV thrown in.

The two items I see people thinking about TiVo glaze over on is the monthly sub and the fact the cable guy has to come and install something in the TiVo box a cable card that many have never even heard of. The monthly sub can be overcome by speaking in terms of box cost plus lifetime, but that upfront money can be daunting as well.

And you simply do not know the value of a TiVo DVR until you have used a TiVo DVR


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

nrc said:


> ............... TiVo has limited resources and they've chosen to focus them on cable partners and law suits rather than paid subscribers. That may be the best thing for the company in the long run if it pans out, but it may sink them if it doesn't.


I agree, and would ask: Where does the concept of a "TiVo fan" fit into this picture? That concept might have applied ten years ago when TiVo was a completely different company.


ZeoTiVo said:


> all of that pales over the one main stumbling block. When I bought into TiVo DVRs a significant nice factor was that I could install them without even giving the cable company a thought. No upgrade to a digital tier needed and no truck roll to have some 3rd party contractor tell me a bunch of BS while sort of making things work.
> 
> Until that can happen with the digital broadcasts, TiVo has a problem - especially with SDV thrown in............And you simply do not know the value of a TiVo DVR until you have used a TiVo DVR


I agree, although I'm having a hard time appreciating the special TiVo-only features when it's a struggle just to get it installed properly and keep it functioning reliably as a basic DVR. Internet VOD is the future and it can't come soon enough for me.


----------



## jrtroo (Feb 4, 2008)

ZeoTiVo said:


> all of that pales over the one main stumbling block. When I bought into TiVo DVRs a significant nice factor was that I could install them without even giving the cable company a thought. No upgrade to a digital tier needed and no truck roll to have some 3rd party contractor tell me a bunch of BS while sort of making things work.
> 
> Until that can happen with the digital broadcasts, TiVo has a problem - especially with SDV thrown in.
> 
> The two items I see people thinking about TiVo glaze over on is the monthly sub and the fact the cable guy has to come and install something in the TiVo box a cable card that many have never even heard of. The monthly sub can be overcome by speaking in terms of box cost plus lifetime, but that upfront money can be daunting as well.


Indeed. I love TiVo, I have an HD and Premiere, but for each of my devices I would have given up prior to set up if I had not known the benefit from my old S-2. _Any _extra step is a PITA, especially one with a truck roll and extra cableco charges, and is a turn off to the non-techie who just wants to use their box.


----------



## Chris Gerhard (Apr 27, 2002)

I read complaints about Blu-ray at High Def Digest and High Def Forum and come here and read complaints about TiVo. I dropped DirecTV because I love Blu-ray and TiVo, and I use TiVo with OTA and the various internet options and think everything is great and just don't understand the complaints. Somehow the mentality is everybody expects something incredible for no money. I am in awe of what current technology has delivered at the price. I do see that TiVo is struggling financially, there just isn't a large enough market willing to pay the necessary price for the service although I sure don't see any alternatives being touted that are worth using instead of TiVo.


----------



## larrs (May 2, 2005)

Seems to me this is not unexpected and Rogers may be right. It is a combination of the many SD boxes moving out and the move to no longer be a hardware provider.

If the DirecTivos come avaialable in April as expected and the other cableco integration starts ramping up as expected, we may not care about sub numbers- it would mean Tivo is going to be healthy.

In my area, my provider just moved to all digital. I no longer have an SD box, but if I had, it would be worthless as I doubt the IR blaster from my old SD Tivo box would work with the required DTA, like most people I don't know, and even if it did, it would make my old DT box a single tuner which is unacceptable in today's market.

Am I concerned Tivo couldn't convert more of those to Premieres? Of course, but again, hardware is not where they want to go.


Tivo just needs me to be the head of new product direction- I know how the hardware they do keep needs to evolve. All they need to do is ask!


----------



## T.DurdensOthr1/2 (Jul 31, 2010)

FCC Mandated that if a Cable Provider offers self installs of any product or service it's now required they offer self installs of the cable cards. No truck roll even needed. Why pay for cable anyway? FREE HD OTA, Streambaby, Netflix, HuluPLUS and Amazon cover's the cable/satellite bill AND saves money. People buy tivo because they understand the value in the investment.
People cancel TiVo because they're too lazy to do research and maximize the value of their investment and what they've paid for. Rather than reinvesting in a new system that can replace cable/satellite they get lazy and let the cable company ram the bills up their ____ with installation fees, lease and service fees for the dvrs, cable bills and headaches.. rather than getting the best DVR System ever offered in the history of TV that is self install and the most user friendly system available.. people just need to get a clue about what TiVo really is and what it can really do. Once people see that, they'll never have any doubts about the power of the company and the future it holds.


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

Did anyone actually listen to the webcast? I got around to listening to the replay today, focusing more on the Q&A portion. A couple points that I heard, and will paraphrase:


R&D budget increased by $25 million
Increased engineering costs to implement the software into the MSO's different environments
Developing new features into the current retail and MSO hardware and software

Litigation cost increased by $7 million
Protect Tivo's IP
Pursue shareholder profits

Standalone retail devices are still viewed as valuable for development

Of those items, the only one that mildly bothers me is the mention of litigation to increase shareholder profits. It's just a statement I don't understand. Unless it means TiVo is going to pursue those that don't represent a major competitive threat that are infringing on their IP. I'm looking at Microsoft MediaCenter or AppleTV here...


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

Chris Gerhard said:


> I read complaints about Blu-ray at High Def Digest and High Def Forum and come here and read complaints about TiVo. I dropped DirecTV because I love Blu-ray and TiVo, and I use TiVo with OTA and the various internet options and think everything is great and just don't understand the complaints. Somehow the mentality is everybody expects something incredible for no money. I am in awe of what current technology has delivered at the price. I do see that TiVo is struggling financially, there just isn't a large enough market willing to pay the necessary price for the service although I sure don't see any alternatives being touted that are worth using instead of TiVo.


Unfortunately the easy alternative is the cable DVR box, I know I would never willing give up TiVo for the cable DVR but for most people the TiVo hassle factor is big, you rent a cable DVR, *no cable cards*,* SDV*, *OD* to concern your self with, also no hardware problems with free on sight service if the cable DVR box does go dead, many TiVo customers were with TiVo before HD when there was no cable DVR and we loved the TiVo UI, I had to use a cable DVR when I first got a HDTV as the Series 3 had not come out yet. It was better than nothing but i changed out to TiVo HD units after they came out. I don't think there is any easy answer for the TiVo stand alone (new) customer, and getting the HDUI finished will not make much of a difference except on forms like like this. For my less tech savvy friends I don't push TiVo because then I get the service calls/questions. If they use the cable DVR I get no calls about its operation.


----------



## bschuler2007 (Feb 25, 2007)

I think alot of people thought Tivo would be the first, or atleast best, to integrate a DVR with internet functions (PPV, Youtube), and eventually compete with the best PC to TV media streaming boxes. Heck, Tivo even touted the "One Box to rule them all" slogan. Wich, yeah, they win TV.. but be fair.. Tivo sucks at Music, Internet videos, etc.

So to some the gradual push to go more of a cable box subscriber route is a huge let down. Sure, they'll develop on the stand alone boxes.. but develop what? My guess is anything that would appeal to a cable company and cost us customers money to use. Home shopping app.. I am sure it on the way.. but really, how long does it take to make HD Screens!?!?!?

So all in all.. I think alot of people are giving up on Tivo and finding other products that serve their main interests better. For me.. I could see giving up the DVR functions for a non-monthly fee'd media box to serve PC media files in the future.

As for all the HATE posts.. the only LOVE post I ever saw on the internet was to Valve over Team Fortress 2...1000's of posts.. then a few months later.. Valve introduced the Team Fortress 2 in-game store. Most of those LOVE posters then joined the huge backlash against Valve. 

Moral of the story: posting HATE posts might get a company to change for the good. Posting LOVE posts might get a company to change for the bad.
I'll take hate posts over love posts any day.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

nrc said:


> I recently got a Palm Pre2 which I love. When I joined a forum for the device I was really surprised at how unhappy a lot of folks there are with Palm/HP. Lots to love about this device but the vocal minority are always there to turn the focus back to the shortcomings.
> 
> I think this is a growing trend in the gadget community. Everyone is spec obsessed and unless they can defend their device as the best solution against all comers they're just miserable. "Yeah, this does what I care about better than anything else" is no longer sufficient.
> 
> ...


Very good summation of the current situation and their problems here. I agree 100% with this. I can only add that, to me, they are shooting themselves in the foot by not actively maintaining a presence here, regardless of how much heat they take. When you don't explain almost anything you do (or don't do) to your customers, is it surprising that the vacuum will be filled by folks on a rant when you don't deliver what they are asking for? I don't think so.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

orangeboy said:


> Of those items, the only one that mildly bothers me is the mention of litigation to increase shareholder profits. It's just a statement I don't understand. Unless it means TiVo is going to pursue those that don't represent a major competitive threat that are infringing on their IP. I'm looking at Microsoft MediaCenter or AppleTV here...


I think you read too much into the corporate speak. They are just stating that they expect the litigation to yield a net positive ROI, not so much that they are seeing it as its own profit center


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

ZeoTiVo said:


> all of that pales over the one main stumbling block. When I bought into TiVo DVRs a significant nice factor was that I could install them without even giving the cable company a thought.


I agree, this is the single greatest impediment to purchasing a Tivo. There's two aspects - one is the inconvenience of having to schedule a truck roll and/or do a self-install, and second is the additional cost of having to rent a cablecard and/or pay for an 'additional digital outlet'. You can't just plug in a Tivo and use it like the old days. Of course, neither can you just plug in a TV and use it. I'd really love to go OTA-only and be rid of the cableco permanently.

The absurdly high monthly fee of owning a Tivo is another concern (especially coupled with cable card and digital outlet fees), although I agree that it's mitigated by those willing to purchase a lifetime subscription (the only reasonable way to own a Tivo, IMO).

Further down the list is that the box simply doesn't work right and isn't complete. It's not really an impediment to purchase as most users are assuming it functions correctly and/or are willing to forgive the minor level of imperfection. It's only a few with truly show-stopping issues.



Orangeboy said:


> Of those items, the only one that mildly bothers me is the mention of litigation to increase shareholder profits. It's just a statement I don't understand. Unless it means TiVo is going to pursue those that don't represent a major competitive threat that are infringing on their IP.


There's money in them thar' patents. Owning patents is a business in and of itself. Regardless of a whether a competitor represents a "threat", there is money to be made from licensing fees if they infringe upon a patent. We should expect Tivo to go after that as much as any other source of revenue. As far as "shareholder profits", that's what a corporation is all about. As a shareholder myself, I appreciate my profits and would be somewhat unhappy if my profits were not a primary goal.


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

ZeoTiVo said:


> I think you read too much into the corporate speak. They are just stating that they expect the litigation to yield a net positive ROI, not so much that they are seeing it as its own profit center





smbaker said:


> There's money in them thar' patents. Owning patents is a business in and of itself. Regardless of a whether a competitor represents a "threat", there is money to be made from licensing fees if they infringe upon a patent. We should expect Tivo to go after that as much as any other source of revenue. As far as "shareholder profits", that's what a corporation is all about. As a shareholder myself, I appreciate my profits and would be somewhat unhappy if my profits were not a primary goal.


Oh, understood. Litigation to protect IP is a form of loss prevention. It just sounded a little to close to "ambulance chasing" to me...


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

MrSkippy53 said:


> TiVo not look very good. It's clear that with the decline in subs, (21%) people are just not willing to go the TiVo route when it's really not much cheaper than renting a HD DVR from the Cable Co. In my case I save about a buck a month by owning a TiVo (12.95 sub plus 1.50 cable card rental). TiVos are not hitting the market with features that the other boxes don't have.
> 
> What will TiVo need to do to keep you as a customer next year?


The vast majority of the 2 millions lost subs were from DirecTV.
Subs have been decreasing ever since DirecTV had decided to dump TiVo. But of course two years later they re-embraced them, but there is still nothing to show for it yet.

At one point I had seven or eight TiVos with DirecTV and i would have never left them had they not decided to dump the HDTiVo.
Although my SD DirecTV TiVo boxes did end up in the hands of friends so I guess I did help increase their subsription rates. The three HDTiVos still sit in my closet. One day I will dump them and the six 250GB ide hard drives that are still in them.


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

orangeboy said:


> Oh, understood. Litigation to protect IP is a form of loss prevention. It just sounded a little to close to "ambulance chasing" to me...


It's more than just 'loss prevention', it's a way to make a profit. You patent something that you know will be in demand, and then you either license use of that patent, or sue those who infringe on it. Litigation can be a form of income like any other. If you own a patent, it's an asset to be used for making a profit.

If you invent a widget, you don't need to market and sell widgets in order to make money from them. You need only patent the widget, wait for someone else market and sell them, and then sue for infringement.


----------



## solutionsetc (Apr 2, 2009)

nrc said:


> For one thing, TiVo has effectively abandoned any attempt to be a "community friendly"  they've chosen to focus them on cable partners and law suits rather than paid subscribers.


NRC, your entire post was refreshing and right on the mark. If dealing with TiVo was a great experience, folks wouldn't be thinking of leaving.

With predatory and matter of fact customer service, perpetual beta features, and buggy and unfinished products, the people who know TiVo best have come to expect disappointment. That's a pretty sad state of affairs.

While I still feel it is is the best DVR for my needs, my TiVo experience (ala the company) has been disappointing at best. And after years as a subscriber, I have no expectations that this will improve. Customers that feel this way will only hang on for so long then they're gone for good.

I think TiVo really missed the boat in not really supporting HME. By making the box less opaque, TiVo could have had third party enthusiasts doing much of their work for them. In fact, without the third party tools that are still available, I would have abandoned TiVo a year ago. And if they had a killer SDK, my company would have most likely written a couple of killer apps for it as I most certainly want to see more.

But the moves made with the Premiere tend to reinforce my gut feeling that the TiVo code base is brittle and obsolete, and they do not have either the resources or the interest to rewrite it. So, the current model is unfinished and all other units are dead in the water, so to speak. Very little to get excited about, really.


----------



## solutionsetc (Apr 2, 2009)

slowbiscuit said:


> Very good summation of the current situation and their problems here. I agree 100% with this. I can only add that, to me, they are shooting themselves in the foot by not actively maintaining a presence here, regardless of how much heat they take. When you don't explain almost anything you do (or don't do) to your customers, is it surprising that the vacuum will be filled by folks on a rant when you don't deliver what they are asking for? I don't think so.


I think TiVo now actually prefers to keep customers at arms length. That certainly was not always the case, but can be fairly common practice with an entity that is in damage control mode. Problem is that mode rarely works out.

They don't even bother to publish changeLogs for software updates. Clearly they have all that info databased and could generate a report from it with less than two shakes of a lamb's tail, but they choose not to share that info with their customers. I can only guess that they are not proud of it. If they were, I 'd guess they'd be shouting it from the roof tops.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

orangeboy said:


> Oh, understood. Litigation to protect IP is a form of loss prevention. It just sounded a little to close to "ambulance chasing" to me...


if they were NOT making deals with cable companies and DirectTV I would be worried, but those kind of deals are their real focus while they actively protect Their IP


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

solutionsetc said:


> Clearly they have all that info databased and could generate a report from it with less than two shakes of a lamb's tail, but they choose not to share that info with their customers. I can only guess that they are not proud of it. If they were, I 'd guess they'd be shouting it from the roof tops.


did they ever produce a change log?


----------



## solutionsetc (Apr 2, 2009)

ZeoTiVo said:


> did they ever produce a change log?


I don't honestly know as I was a ReplayTV user back in TiVo's heyday. My Cousin had TiVo back in those days and somehow he was aware of new features in software updates, but perhaps he had to discover them via the Braille method.


----------



## CuriousMark (Jan 13, 2005)

solutionsetc said:


> I don't honestly know as I was a ReplayTV user back in TiVo's heyday. My Cousin had TiVo back in those days and somehow he was aware of new features in software updates, but perhaps he had to discover them via the Braille method.


I am not aware of ever seeing a change log, but usually when there is a new update TiVo will put up a pre TiVo Central message for the first time you press the TiVo button after the new software reboots. In that message they list the new features that were added. I don't believe the PTCM has ever listed bug fixes, but I could be wrong about that.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

It's not exactly a change log, but TiVoJerry does post here (most of the time) to relate info pertaining to a software update.

Recent example.

I bet if you did a search for all of TiVoJerry's posts, you could piece together somewhat of a change log.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

solutionsetc said:


> I don't honestly know as I was a ReplayTV user back in TiVo's heyday. My Cousin had TiVo back in those days and somehow he was aware of new features in software updates, but perhaps he had to discover them via the Braille method.


back in the S1, S2 days the forum was friendly to TiVo employees and they delighted in dropping hints for us and then usually giving us a few days heads up that the feature was being released, ahh good times... sigh


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

nrc said:


> I recently got a Palm Pre2 which I love. When I joined a forum for the device I was really surprised at how unhappy a lot of folks there are with Palm/HP. Lots to love about this device but the vocal minority are always there to turn the focus back to the shortcomings.
> 
> I think this is a growing trend in the gadget community. Everyone is spec obsessed and unless they can defend their device as the best solution against all comers they're just miserable. "Yeah, this does what I care about better than anything else" is no longer sufficient.
> 
> ...





ZeoTiVo said:


> all of that pales over the one main stumbling block. When I bought into TiVo DVRs a significant nice factor was that I could install them without even giving the cable company a thought. No upgrade to a digital tier needed and no truck roll to have some 3rd party contractor tell me a bunch of BS while sort of making things work.
> 
> Until that can happen with the digital broadcasts, TiVo has a problem - especially with SDV thrown in.
> 
> ...


Those are two of the most insightful posts about TiVo I have read in a long, long time and wholly reflect my feelings about TiVo as a CE device and as a company. Well done.

With respect to doom sayers, the arguments and discussions haven't changed in ten years. There is no one "silver bullet" CE product that can beat TiVo for what it does. If or when that device appears, then they may gain some credibility, until then...it's still TiVo.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

ZeoTiVo said:


> if they were NOT making deals with cable companies and DirectTV I would be worried, but those kind of deals are their real focus while they actively protect Their IP


I see the logic of what you say. The part I don't understand is the implication that you might be worried if TiVo didn't succeed as a business.

I don't understand why. What are the reasons for me (or you) to be concerned about TiVo's future?

1. Is their existence going to be critical, or even have major impact, on our future video consumption experience? Possibly if the five major Cable MSO's actually bring out TiVo-based DVRs under reasonable terms, or if the new DirectTV HD TiVo actually arrives and has a good feature set. I'm skeptical about either of these happening in the near future, if ever.

2. Do we care about their success emotionally because of the great debt of loyalty we owe them for pioneering the DVR? I doubt it. How many TiVo employees are still there who deserve this loyalty? Is it in any way the same group of pioneers?

3. Is it because we own TiVo stock? Not in my case. Don't know how many TiVo fanboys do.

4. Are we concerned that if TiVo folds they won't be able to provide our subscriptions for program data? That's a possible concern but seems a minor one to me. I think the odds of this happening in the next two years are very slim -- and after that I expect to be moving on from TiVo anyway.

So I don't see the reason even a fanboy should be worried about TiVo's future, unless they own stock.



richsadams said:


> ........With respect to doom sayers, the arguments and discussions haven't changed in ten years. There is no one "silver bullet" CE product that can beat TiVo for what it does. If or when that device appears, then they may gain some credibility, until then...it's still TiVo.


Despite the negative tone of my above comments, I agree with Rich on this. (I try not to disagree with him as a matter of policy. )


----------



## MrSkippy53 (Jan 27, 2011)

Chris Gerhard said:


> I sure don't see any alternatives being touted that are worth using instead of TiVo.


Moxi DVR $5 per mo sub 3 tuner Cable Card and can stream recorded content to other boxes in the house ( other boxes without a CO additional outlet fee). Cable CO DVR, whole home DVR $19.00 per month


----------



## KCcardsfan (Feb 20, 2011)

I think they should make a push for capturing a market of people who are looking at dropping cable/sat and moving to OTA and streaming. They need to concentrate on beefing up their streaming side of the TIVO box. As more and more programming becomes available via streaming. There will be alot of people who want to take control of their TV viewing and not pay a company to provide them with 200 channels that they don't watch. They can continue to support cable and Direct-TV if they want, but the niche they have that the others just don't is the ability to record OTA. MOXI doesn't do that. The Channel Master can but the service is timer based and not user friendly. If they beef up their streaming and make sure their OTA tuners are top of the line. They can market as an all in one machine for cord cutting. 

I just recently bought a TIVO and am cutting the cord at the end of my contract with DISH this month and I think there is a huge number of people like myself that would like to keep a DVR as well as streaming to fill their television viewing needs.


----------



## solutionsetc (Apr 2, 2009)

MrSkippy53 said:


> Moxi DVR $5 per mo sub 3 tuner Cable Card and can stream recorded content to other boxes in the house (other boxes without a CO additional outlet fee).


Are you sure about this? When did Moxi implement any kind of subscription fee? I see no indication of this on their web site.


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

KCcardsfan said:


> ...They can market as an all in one machine for cord cutting...


I don't see this ever happening.
http://www.ncta.com/Stats/TopMSOs.aspx


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

dlfl said:


> Despite the negative tone of my above comments, I agree with Rich on this. (I try not to disagree with him as a matter of policy. )


Ha! I thought the tone was very honest myself...always preferable. :up: After reading the last line of my post I realize I should have said "...until then...it's TiVo _for me_". Everyone's MMV of course.


----------



## uw69 (Jan 25, 2001)

MrSkippy53 said:


> TiVo not look very good. It's clear that with the decline in subs, (21%) people are just not willing to go the TiVo route when it's really not much cheaper than renting a HD DVR from the Cable Co. In my case I save about a buck a month by owning a TiVo (12.95 sub plus 1.50 cable card rental). TiVos are not hitting the market with features that the other boxes don't have.
> 
> What will TiVo need to do to keep you as a customer next year?


1) A box with more than 2 tuners

2) DLNA compliant

3) Amazon VOD that works with the free prime service.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

MrSkippy53 said:


> What will TiVo need to do to keep you as a customer next year?


Keep the service running.


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

Finish the HD menus for the HD box that was released almost a year ago.

Also, update the Netflix interface. I guess faster updates is my answer.


----------



## t1voproof (Feb 6, 2010)

The earnings results are not surprising. Hardware problems aside, the losses would still have been there.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

dlfl said:


> I see the logic of what you say. The part I don't understand is the implication that you might be worried if TiVo didn't succeed as a business.


I only meant I would be worried TiVo would be an IP troll.
I only care about the company staying in business so my standalone DVRs continue to get more value added via more content options.

Folks have been reading way too much into my posts lately


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

ZeoTiVo said:


> I only meant I would be worried TiVo would be an IP troll.
> I only care about the company staying in business so my standalone DVRs continue to get more value added via more content options.
> 
> Folks have been reading way too much into my posts lately


Hey, folks do that.  Sorry, I guess you weren't a fair target for my comments in post #34. BTW what is an "IP troll" ?

I am just curious what logic (or emotion) is behind the implicit assumption that TiVo's future financial success is of great importance (to anyone other than TiVo and its stockholders), found in some fanboy posts here. Not sayin they are "wrong", just sayin I don't understand their thinking.


----------



## MrSkippy53 (Jan 27, 2011)

solutionsetc said:


> Are you sure about this? When did Moxi implement any kind of subscription fee? I see no indication of this on their web site.


You r correct Moxi does not have a DVR sub cost.

So a Premiere with PLS ($299+399) is $698. Moxi is $599. a two room Moxi system is $799 so with the Moxi it's $100 more for a two room system to share recording. With the cost per mo for a second outlet fee from the provider you make that back in a year.

Two rooms with a TiVo (where you still can't stream all recording from one box to another) would be almost $1500


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

dlfl said:


> Hey, folks do that.  Sorry, I guess you weren't a fair target for my comments in post #34. BTW what is an "IP troll" ?
> 
> I am just curious what logic (or emotion) is behind the implicit assumption that TiVo's future financial success is of great importance (to anyone other than TiVo and its stockholders), found in some fanboy posts here. Not sayin they are "wrong", just sayin I don't understand their thinking.


IP troll - just my shorthand for a company that plans to simply make money off of patents versus doing anything real.

As to why folks are emotionally attached to TiVo inc.?
First off - that is an assumption made based on posts here. SO it is hard to say what level of emotional attachment there is. If TiVo inc. declared suddenly they were closing up shop I would be fine emotionally and too busy figuring out what to do with my DVR situation to grieve long.

Of course companies do engender such emotional attachments at times. If Apple announced they were closing up - the internet routers would likely be short circuiting from all the flowing tears.


----------



## KCcardsfan (Feb 20, 2011)

Quote:
Originally Posted by KCcardsfan View Post
...They can market as an all in one machine for cord cutting...

I don't see this ever happening.

What cord cutting or TIVO being an all-in one machine for DVR and internet TV viewing? Because both are happening. YES the big providers have huge numbers but all their numbers have fallen off in a dramatic fashion the last few years with the economy and as people reevaluate where their money goes. Many deciding that they don't have to give the cagle/sat company 50-100 every month and they can get most everything through the internet or on demand venues. I think if Cable/Sat is going to stem the losses they may have to find a way to let customers customize their plans more and give people what they want instead of 100's of channels they don't really want.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

MrSkippy53 said:


> You r correct Moxi does not have a DVR sub cost.
> 
> So a Premiere with PLS ($299+399) is $698. Moxi is $599. a two room Moxi system is $799 so with the Moxi it's $100 more for a two room system to share recording. With the cost per mo for a second outlet fee from the provider you make that back in a year.
> 
> Two rooms with a TiVo (where you still can't stream all recording from one box to another) would be almost $1500


This is all not new ground - there are pros and cons around that incoorect math 
first the 698 is retail price and can be lowered via shopping
second last I looked 698+698 = 1396 which never rounds off to 1500.

now with the 2 TiVo DVRs you have 4 tuners capable of digital/analog /OTA and of course the two drives for recording space versus just one.
Netflix and Amazon can be done directly on the TiVo with no PC involved. HD quality is possible

with Moxi you have 3 digital cable tuners only and no OTA and analog is an added dongle.
Netflix and Amazon is dependant on PC and playon - though that allows for Hulu nad some other stuff playon brings to the table. No HD on playon unless they have updated that.

tradeoffs, oh and Moxi was sold to some other company and I have seen no reports on how long or where that company plans to take Moxi.


----------



## 241705 (Mar 9, 2010)

KCcardsfan said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by KCcardsfan View Post
> ...They can market as an all in one machine for cord cutting...
> 
> ... I think if Cable/Sat is going to stem the losses they may have to find a way to let customers customize their plans more and give people what they want instead of 100's of channels they don't really want.


Or, they're just going to jack our internet rates up.


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

KCcardsfan said:


> What cord cutting or TIVO being an all-in one machine for DVR and internet TV viewing?


The encouragement from TiVo to "cord cut". That would not a good business strategy when trying to attract the MSOs that TiVo is trying to partner with.

Hey TWC! Let TiVo be your preferred DVR platform!
Hey TWC customers! Save money by cancelling your TWC account, and going OTA!

What do you think TWC's answer would be?


----------



## solutionsetc (Apr 2, 2009)

ZeoTiVo said:


> tradeoffs, oh and Moxi was sold to some other company and I have seen no reports on how long or where that company plans to take Moxi.


All of what you say is true, but that "other" company is Arris Group. When compared to TiVo, it is a company with virtually unlimited resources.

Another thing worth mentioning is that the Moxi has a 500 GB drive and is expandable to 6 TB with standard eSata drives.

But the deal breaker for me is no comparable feature to TTGO. They need to fix that and I would take them up on their 30 day trial in a heartbeat.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

A box without a way to transfer my recorded content for permanent storage is not much use to me. That is one big thing that Moxi is missing


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

ZeoTiVo said:


> ... no truck roll to have some 3rd party contractor tell me a bunch of BS while sort of making things work.





ZeoTiVo said:


> The two items I see people thinking about TiVo glaze over on is the monthly sub and the fact the cable guy has to come and install something in the TiVo box a cable card that many have never even heard of....


The FCC has actually imposed a mandate that will require cable companies to allow self installs of CableCARDs, eliminating at least part of your complaint. Although I think they still have a few more months before that regulation goes into effect,

Also you don't "have" to upgrade to a digital tier. A S3/HD/S4 TiVo will still record from your analog stations just fine. And if you don't upgrade to a digital tier then you don't have to deal with the CableCARD install either.

Dan


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

KCcardsfan said:


> ......... Many deciding that they don't have to give the cagle/sat company 50-100 every month and they can get most everything through the internet or on demand venues. I think if Cable/Sat is going to stem the losses they may have to find a way to let customers customize their plans more and give people what they want instead of 100's of channels they don't really want.





blackngold75 said:


> Or, they're just going to jack our internet rates up.


I don't see where having the cord cut is much of a threat to cable cos since they typically also deliver the internet, actually over the same cable. Of course there will be increased costs for internet infrastructure as more video comes that way but that doesn't scare me at all. I don't expect to get the programming I now watch on cable free just because it comes via internet.

Just my hunch, but I suspect the infrastructure cost to deliver video via internet will be less than it is via cableTV. The payment for content will be there either way, of course, and I don't expect to avoid that. Perhaps bit torrent has spoiled some folks into thinking copyrighted content should be free just because it can now be downloaded on the net.

Let me put it another way: I would love to get the video programming I now get via cable TV over the internet and would be willing to pay as much as I am now paying for cable. Not only would I have a one-box experience but I would avoid having to fuss with CableCARD, tuning adapter, and hard drive replacements. If things are properly done, I wouldn't need a hard drive because any programming I've paid for once, could be called up VOD whenever I wanted to watch it again, including trick play features. Maybe a sizeable buffer of local memory but that's a lot more reliable than a HDD.


----------



## KCcardsfan (Feb 20, 2011)

dlfl said:


> I don't expect to get the programming I now watch on cable free just because it comes via internet.


Right now quite a bit of it is free legally on the Internet if you don't mind waiting about a month after the air date. As the % of people who watch over the internet rises the program providers will start trying to control it more and profit off of it.


----------



## KCcardsfan (Feb 20, 2011)

orangeboy said:


> The encouragement from TiVo to "cord cut". That would not a good business strategy when trying to attract the MSOs that TiVo is trying to partner with.
> 
> Hey TWC! Let TiVo be your preferred DVR platform!
> Hey TWC customers! Save money by cancelling your TWC account, and going OTA!
> ...


I seriously doubt they have any shot at being the prefered DVR for any cable system. Those companies will always drive their customers to their own DVR's. It seems reading on these forums that most of the companies act annoyed having to deal with the cable cards. The DirectTV thing has been a fiasco as well. They have one business area where they are basically the only game in town providing DVR with an extensive guide for OTA customers. I am not saying they ignore the others but they have that business available now and for a company that is losing subs they should concentrate on every avenue to get new business.


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

KCcardsfan said:


> I seriously doubt they have any shot at being the prefered DVR for any cable system...


I guess you hadn't heard about these deals: 
Virgin Media Selects TiVo For Next Generation TV Platform
RCN Selects TiVo as its Primary DVR Platform 
Suddenlink & TiVo Announce Strategic Distribution Agreement 
ONO Partners With TiVo to Develop Next Generation TV in Spain


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Dan203 said:


> Also you don't "have" to upgrade to a digital tier. A S3/HD/S4 TiVo will still record from your analog stations just fine.


Though of course that removes most of the benefit of those Tivos vs a S2DT. (..and is why you put have in quotes.)

Then again, I used my S3 & TivoHD for years analog only (after most of expanded basic went to digital only locally, then I got a cablecard for my TivoHD.. then quite a while later 2 more for my S3)


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

You're right that it's why I put it in quotes. However Zeo was listing it as a reason why TiVo is losing ground, when in fact the S3/HD/S4 is no different then the S2 except that the S2 required a box and the S3/HD/S4 units require a CableCARD. In fact one of the biggest advantages of the S3/HD/S4 units is their ability to record two of those digital channels at once, which is actually a benefit provided by the CableCARD requirement not hindered by it. 

I will concede that the install, and install fees, are a PITA but the FCC is trying to remedy that for us, so hopefully that wont be a big issue in the future.

Dan


----------



## JavierBrekke (Mar 4, 2011)

The subscription is way too expensive !

We want price cutbacks !


----------



## replaytv (Feb 21, 2011)

If my memory is correct, a Series 2 Tivo on ebay with lifetime has come down about 33% over the last year. So why do people continue to pay a monthly fee when they can have lifetime? I can understand it if they want High Definition, then they do have to pay a premium for lifetime, but right now U can get a Series 2 lifetime box for under $100 on ebay.


----------



## JimboG (May 27, 2007)

replaytv said:


> If my memory is correct, a Series 2 Tivo on ebay with lifetime has come down about 33% over the last year. So why do people continue to pay a monthly fee when they can have lifetime? I can understand it if they want High Definition, then they do have to pay a premium for lifetime, but right now U can get a Series 2 lifetime box for under $100 on ebay.


It's 2011. Why on earth would you buy a DVR that can't handle HD content?


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

JavierBrekke said:


> The subscription is way too expensive !
> 
> We want price cutbacks !


TiVo did that with the $0 and $99 hardware pricing. Pay full price on the hardware and you get lower subscription rates. You can't have both (and expect TiVo to stay in business for very long).


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

solutionsetc said:


> All of what you say is true, but that "other" company is Arris Group. When compared to TiVo, it is a company with virtually unlimited resources.


True, but I keep up with the Moxi thread over at AVS and if you think Tivo software dev is slow, you should see what Arris is (not) delivering for the Moxi. I think the consensus is that they bought out Digeo for the IP, not to keep the home DVR line going in any meaningful way. There are some nasty bugs that still haven't been fixed on that platform a year after the purchase too.


----------



## RetroElectro (Feb 2, 2011)

KCcardsfan said:


> I think they should make a push for capturing a market of people who are looking at dropping cable/sat and moving to OTA and streaming. They need to concentrate on beefing up their streaming side of the TIVO box. As more and more programming becomes available via streaming. There will be alot of people who want to take control of their TV viewing and not pay a company to provide them with 200 channels that they don't watch. They can continue to support cable and Direct-TV if they want, but the niche they have that the others just don't is the ability to record OTA. MOXI doesn't do that. The Channel Master can but the service is timer based and not user friendly. If they beef up their streaming and make sure their OTA tuners are top of the line. They can market as an all in one machine for cord cutting.
> 
> I just recently bought a TIVO and am cutting the cord at the end of my contract with DISH this month and I think there is a huge number of people like myself that would like to keep a DVR as well as streaming to fill their television viewing needs.


I agree with this 100%. I've been cable free for over 2 years now and recently bought a lifetimed series 3 tivo for OTA. The reason I went series 3 vs the premiere was due to the complaints on the premiere's tuner performance. This means tivo received $0 from me even though I was certainly ready to buy a lifetimed premiere. I use a network streamer for online and local content but can see the appeal if there was an all in one box that did it all. For cord cutters, it certainly makes more sense to use a DVR to capture HD broadcast content, than it would be to pay for hulu+ and get it resized to 720p. Also, with cable companies introducing bandwidth caps, you really don't want to use your bandwidth streaming that content.

They need to focus on the cord cutter market since it represents growth (good for the stock) and because there isn't an established market leader here. What they should do is:
1) Improve the OTA tuner to be best in class
2) Study the current market for the enthusiast pain points to provide an idiot-proof experience for the masses
3) Partner with Boxee or another experienced online developer to provide video streaming and to integrate with tivo's DVR archiving
4) Become IP Trolls (unfortunately) to either receive licensing fees from cable company DVRs or to prevent cable cos. from dumping tivo DVRs.


----------



## solutionsetc (Apr 2, 2009)

slowbiscuit said:


> if you think Tivo software dev is slow, you should see what Arris is (not) delivering ... some nasty bugs that still haven't been fixed on that platform a year after the purchase too.


Sad to hear that. I do not know what it is with software dev on these things... compared to real computer software, these things are just a handful of applets.

I guess my next DVR will be a PC.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> You're right that it's why I put it in quotes. However Zeo was listing it as a reason why TiVo is losing ground, when in fact the S3/HD/S4 is no different then the S2 except that the S2 required a box and the S3/HD/S4 units require a CableCARD. In fact one of the biggest advantages of the S3/HD/S4 units is their ability to record two of those digital channels at once, which is actually a benefit provided by the CableCARD requirement not hindered by it.
> 
> I will concede that the install, and install fees, are a PITA but the FCC is trying to remedy that for us, so hopefully that wont be a big issue in the future.
> 
> Dan


But you're leaving out Tuning Adapter install/support issues. I have had no install or support issues with my CableCARDs but the TA has more than made up for that! There is a long standing issue of occasional failure to tune SDV channels (resulting in lost recordings). TiVo has been aware of this for many months, if not years, but they don't appear to be concerned. My other TA problems were more serious than this but seem to be finally solved -- after more than a year of hassle.

TA problems are not a minor side issue. Many cable systems already use SDV and the trend is in that direction. I've seen nothing in the FCC's "remedies" that addresses these TA issues, other than grand schemes to replace the entire CableCARD/TA architecture. Who knows when or if these schemes will actually provide good solutions for us?


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> You're right that it's why I put it in quotes. However Zeo was listing it as a reason why TiVo is losing ground, when in fact the S3/HD/S4 is no different then the S2 except that the S2 required a box and the S3/HD/S4 units require a CableCARD. In fact one of the biggest advantages of the S3/HD/S4 units is their ability to record two of those digital channels at once, which is actually a benefit provided by the CableCARD requirement not hindered by it.
> 
> I will concede that the install, and install fees, are a PITA but the FCC is trying to remedy that for us, so hopefully that wont be a big issue in the future.
> 
> Dan


I did not make it really clear but what I was doing was comparing the old TiVo sales pitch of getting an S2 and recording analog with no need to call the cable company or even upgrade to digital.
Indeed that was my initial selling point into TiVo DVR. TWC wanted me to add 35$ a month to my cable bill to get digital before even talking about what DVR would cost. as well. I had no desire for digital since I only want the extended basic cable.
NOTE - I still only record analog today and use OTA for HD I do have one free cable box but it constantly shuts itself off and I really do not use it though it is hooked to a TiVo DT. I should unplug the thing. I agree that needing the Box with an S2 for digital is even more onerous than cable cards

With the S3 on up platforms though, most do not buy them to record analog  so to get a TiVo DVR and record digital/HD requires dealing with the cable company which is a deterrent.

I was indeed thinking of the proposals before the FCC for allvid and/or a home gateway standard so consumers can get back to the days of plugging a coax run into their shiny new toy and it works without having to wait for cable guy to show up.

Also note how TiVo now speaks of cable cutters in their PR and meetings. TiVo made an , I think, wise choice to stay with 2 tuners and keep OTA included versus Moxi or Virgin 3 tuners but no OTA chipsets


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

JimboG said:


> It's 2011. Why on earth would you buy a DVR that can't handle HD content?


Well, I don't own a single HDTV. And when I buy one (hopefully this month), that will be one. My other TVs will still be SD. Why pay for an HD DVR for these TVs? I just want one for my kids.

And I'll probably be getting the HR24 DVR from DirecTV.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Reasons to buy an HD TiVos after you make the switch to one HDTV....

1) The S2 quality is going to look terrible on your HDTV so you're going to want to upgrade that one soon.

2) Once you upgrade one TiVo to an HD unit you wont be able to use MRV with any or your older S2 units because they aren't able to transfer HD programs, and most of what you'll record on the new HD TiVo will be HD. 

Dan


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

BobCamp1 said:


> Well, I don't own a single HDTV. And when I buy one (hopefully this month), that will be one. My other TVs will still be SD. Why pay for an HD DVR for these TVs? I just want one for my kids.
> 
> And I'll probably be getting the HR24 DVR from DirecTV.


Once you go high-def you can never go back. I know that doesn't rhyme, but not much rhymes with def.


----------



## MediaLivingRoom (Dec 10, 2002)

Get rid of Tom Rogers, get a new CEO.


----------



## Test (Dec 8, 2004)

orangeboy said:


> TiVo did that with the $0 and $99 hardware pricing. Pay full price on the hardware and you get lower subscription rates. You can't have both (and expect TiVo to stay in business for very long).


I know more people that would want a higher upfront cost and lower/no monthly payment.

How much does the guide data actually cost? How can others offer that free? I would think TiVo is rolling in the cash from the subs, but it obviously is costing them


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> Reasons to buy an HD TiVos after you make the switch to one HDTV....
> 
> 1) The S2 quality is going to look terrible on your HDTV so you're going to want to upgrade that one soon.
> 
> ...


I'd love to, but there still is no HD DirecTivo. If there isn't one within two weeks, I'm getting an HR24 and saying goodbye to Tivo after 10 years. With a DirecTV DVR, I can actually MRV any program I want using a regular receiver in the bedroom which I already have. I can't MRV even if I got an S3 or Premier because I have S1s.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

Test said:


> I know more people that would want a higher upfront cost and lower/no monthly payment.
> 
> How much does the guide data actually cost? How can others offer that free? I would think TiVo is rolling in the cash from the subs, but it obviously is costing them


They're not. DVRs cost $7 to $20 per month. Included in that is the price of the guide data. But they have no large upfront fee and are leased. If the box dies, you get a new one for free. For free. Free.

For me, my HR2x will be just $7 / month with a two-year contract. No upfront fee. Enabling MRV is $3 / month. The second box is $6 / month. For just $16 / month, I'll have DVR capability in two rooms along with PPV, VOD, Netflix, and other features. No one can beat that price.

Tivo simply hasn't innovated much, and the others have almost caught up. When you factor in the pricing, Tivo simply isn't worth it anymore.


----------



## richsadams (Jan 4, 2003)

I remember having a Comcast HD DVR for a while...or should I say DVR's? Besides the kludgy UI, minuscule recording time and running hot enough to bake cookies on it the first one failed at about 45 days. Lost all recordings. Took it back and the next one failed within about 30 days. Lost all recordings. Took it back and the next one failed in about 60 days. Lost all recordings. They cheerfully exchanged each one...after I drove to their office each time, took a number and waited about 45 minutes to an hour...each time. But it was all for "free"! Woo hoo! Not.  Sorry, my time really is worth money...and to some degree so are my recordings. 

Got a Series3 TiVo after that...it's still humming along...after several years.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

Dan203 said:


> 2) Once you upgrade one TiVo to an HD unit you wont be able to use MRV with any or your older S2 units because they aren't able to transfer HD programs, and most of what you'll record on the new HD TiVo will be HD.


I can transfer some digital programming from my Tivo HD to the S2. As long as the programming isn't in HD, it can be copied to the S2. Plus I can transfer all programming from an S2 to the Tivo HD. The Tivo HD upscales the S2 programming and it looks very good. Extra S2s are an economical way to get extra tuners.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

Test said:


> I know more people that would want a higher upfront cost and lower/no monthly payment.
> 
> How much does the guide data actually cost? How can others offer that free? I would think TiVo is rolling in the cash from the subs, but it obviously is costing them


If you buy directly from Tivo you can get a higher up-front cost and a lower monthly cost.


----------



## tivogurl (Dec 16, 2004)

ZeoTiVo said:


> When I bought into TiVo DVRs a significant nice factor was that I could install them without even giving the cable company a thought. No upgrade to a digital tier needed and no truck roll to have some 3rd party contractor tell me a bunch of BS while sort of making things work.


That's partly a result of general consumer ignorance. If they knew about the comparatively pathetic recording capacity, missed recordings, and random reboots they'd have to suffer using a cableco DVR they'd look at TiVo more closely. Sadly, if Comcast had a rock-solid reliable DVR with reasonable capacity and a UI that wasn't a masochist's dream I'd probably switch, because while I like and prefer TiVo the constant hassle of having Comcast blame TiVo for their own screwups gets rather old after a while.

Both Cox and Comcast have shown some very slick-looking DVR concepts in the last year, but it remains to be seen if they're any good, or even if they'll actually be deployed. So far as I know, none have been deployed to a paying market. They make good anti-TiVo FUD, though.

A monopoly like them has no particular reason to put out good product, it's not as if their customers have any recourse. Their DVR only has to be good enough not to totally piss off users to keep TiVo at bay. Besides, they'd still get 90+% of the revenue if you dumped their DVR, so even if every user switched to TiVo their profits wouldn't be terribly impacted.


----------



## tivogurl (Dec 16, 2004)

solutionsetc said:


> I guess my next DVR will be a PC.


Windows Media Center itself has some nasty bugs Microsoft hasn't bothered to fix. It is generally believed over at AVS that given the time they've been around they most likely won't be fixed. It is also generally believed that MS has for the most part abandoned the product.


----------



## TroyB (Oct 20, 2006)

I have used TiVo since they came out with the S3 able to record in HD. Paid $800 for 2 TiVo's.
At the end of this month I am changing to AT&T U-Verse not so much TiVo's fault more I am tired of dealing with Time Warner. I have one TiVo that is on lifetime and will probably hook up an Antenna to it and keep it phoning home to stay active the other one I will cancel my discounted monthly rate, kind of sucks though since I am on the $6.95 plan and will lose that if I come back.
TiVo is partly to blame for me leaving though, all these other companies even the Cable Companies DVR's are starting to leave TiVo behind with DVR's that perform like a TiVo should with streaming and a reliable UI. It is as if they have stopped listening and don't care anymore.
I will miss the storage space I have with the 1TB drive installed in my TiVo's but will enjoy all the things I gain (Streaming, VOD, Customer Service, not having to deal with Switched Video, etc.)


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

ZeoTiVo said:


> I did not make it really clear but what I was doing was comparing the old TiVo sales pitch of getting an S2 and recording analog with no need to call the cable company or even upgrade to digital.
> Indeed that was my initial selling point into TiVo DVR. TWC wanted me to add 35$ a month to my cable bill to get digital before even talking about what DVR would cost. as well. I had no desire for digital since I only want the extended basic cable.
> NOTE - I still only record analog today and use OTA for HD I do have one free cable box but it constantly shuts itself off and I really do not use it though it is hooked to a TiVo DT. I should unplug the thing. I agree that needing the Box with an S2 for digital is even more onerous than cable cards
> 
> ...


Both options would be nice. Then I would only have a couple of Premiers with ota capability and the rest would be cable only.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

TroyB said:


> I have used TiVo since they came out with the S3 able to record in HD. Paid $800 for 2 TiVo's.
> At the end of this month I am changing to AT&T U-Verse not soo much TiVo's fault more I am tired of dealing with Time Warner. I have one TiVo that is on lifetime and will probably hook up an Antenna to it and keep it phoning home to stay active the other one I will cancel my discounted monthly rate, kind of sucks though since I am on the $6.95 plan and will lose that if I come back.
> TiVo is partly to blame for me leaving though, all these other companies even the Cable Companies DVR's are starting to leave TiVo behind with DVR's that perform like a TiVo should with streaming and a reliable UI. It is as if they have stopped listening and don't care anymore.
> I will miss the storage space I have with the 1TB drive installed in my TiVo's but will enjoy all the things I gain (Streaming, VOD, Customer Service, not having to deal with Switched Video, etc.)


I've not used the uverse dvr but the other ones I've used/seen from Comcast, FiOS and satellite,still don't come close to what TiVo offers and It's reliability.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

MediaLivingRoom said:


> Get rid of Tom Rogers, get a new CEO.


And your signature:


> Jan11- 2,049 (in thousands)
> Oct10- 2,272
> Jul10- 2,384
> Jul09- 3,050
> ...


I'm not defending Rogers, but aren't your signature numbers very misleading since they include the loss of DirectTV subscribers?


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

Does that really matter? The trend is obvious.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

tivogurl said:


> That's partly a result of general consumer ignorance. If they knew about the comparatively pathetic recording capacity, missed recordings, and random reboots they'd have to suffer using a cableco DVR they'd look at TiVo more closely.
> 
> A monopoly like them has no particular reason to put out good product, it's not as if their customers have any recourse. Their DVR only has to be good enough not to totally piss off users to keep TiVo at bay. Besides, they'd still get 90+% of the revenue if you dumped their DVR, so even if every user switched to TiVo their profits wouldn't be terribly impacted.


Actually not true. A monopoly has to put out decent (but I admit not great) product. This market is an oligopoly, not a monopoly. So there is actually intense focus on features, since they can't use pricing to differentiate themselves. Tivo is kind of weird, since they're on the outside looking in. They only have part of the solution, and don't really fit in the current market, which is a big part of their problem.

Another problem is that you need to compare the cable company's HD DVR to a VCR or a non-HD DVD recorder, which is what most people are using. When you do that, their DVR is a god send. Most people only record a few shows a week. They don't need or want to spend a lot on a high-end DVR. TWC even has a go-back feature that doesn't require a DVR, which satisfies most people's needs. Most people are fine with whatever their cable company has to offer.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

slowbiscuit said:


> Does that really matter? The trend is obvious.


I think it matters to not be misleading. I don't think exaggerating the trend is justified even when it supports your point of view. It's called spin and I don't like it. If there is even a weak argument that the D* subscriber losses are Rogers' fault then that might be another thing. Is there?


----------



## ejasons (Feb 28, 2001)

I know of two people right now who would buy at least one, maybe two, if a TiVo could be used to record, with guide data, from clear QAM channels that provide accurate PSIP data.

The argument against supporting clear QAM has always been that channels move around, etc. However, that argument is moot if there is accurate PSIP data (and our cable system here does seem to have that -- at least my television has no trouble knowing the channel numbers).


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

ejasons said:


> I know of two people right now who would buy at least one, maybe two, if a TiVo could be used to record, with guide data, from clear QAM channels that provide accurate PSIP data.
> 
> The argument against supporting clear QAM has always been that channels move around, etc. However, that argument is moot if there is accurate PSIP data (and our cable system here does seem to have that -- at least my television has no trouble knowing the channel numbers).


I wouldn't think that implementing a feature that may work in one area but not in another would be very successful.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

dlfl said:


> I think it matters to not be misleading. I don't think exaggerating the trend is justified even when it supports your point of view. It's called spin and I don't like it. If there is even a weak argument that the D* subscriber losses are Rogers' fault then that might be another thing. Is there?


I'm not sure why you don't consider the MSO numbers to be part of Roger's responsibility. While the original loss of DirecTV was outside his control, he has made MSO deals his primary focus since he came on as CEO. To date he hasn't generated enough MSO business to have any impact on the loss of DirecTV subs.

I keep watching the trends thinking that maybe this will be the quarter when those MSO deals make a dent in the downward plunge of TiVo subscribers. It just hasn't happened. Maybe next quarter, but I've been saying that for a year.

Meanwhile Rogers has focused on cost cutting on the standalone side and in the process has created a loss of subscriptions on that side of the house as well. It's easy to blame that on the challenges of competing the in digital cable market - I've made that argument myself. But TiVo started out as the iPhone of the DVR world and they've completely squandered that brand equity.

Now add in mounting losses from increasing R&D costs from pursuing MSO deals that never seem to pan out and you have a perfect storm of failure.

I've been easy on Rogers these past few years because I understood his strategy. But there's no escaping the fact that to date he has failed to deliver positive results for the company or its customers.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

ejasons said:


> I know of two people right now who would buy at least one, maybe two, if a TiVo could be used to record, with guide data, from clear QAM channels that provide accurate PSIP data.
> 
> The argument against supporting clear QAM has always been that channels move around, etc. However, that argument is moot if there is accurate PSIP data (and our cable system here does seem to have that -- at least my television has no trouble knowing the channel numbers).


Just a note about what your saying I was surprised that Windows 7 Media Center does provide the HD channel data for the clear cable channels that have PSIP without any problem, just done automatically. (I have a TV tuner but no cable cards in my computer)


----------



## tivogurl (Dec 16, 2004)

nrc said:


> Now add in mounting losses from increasing R&D costs from pursuing MSO deals that never seem to pan out and you have a perfect storm of failure.


One wonders whether that was intentional on the part of the MSOs. String TiVo along with false promises until they bleed out.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

tivogurl said:


> One wonders whether that was intentional on the part of the MSOs. String TiVo along with false promises until they bleed out.


With all the MSO deals, I wonder what the percentage is between the ones that USE TiVo hardware/software as default vs. those that only offer it upon request.
Of those that only offer TiVo hardware/software upon request, does TiVo require them to advertise the availability?

I can just see it...


Cable Company said:


> WE HAVE A GREAT DVR WITH ALL THE FEATURES YOU NEED.
> 
> psst, btw we also offer TiVo hardware/software upon request at a _slightly_
> HIGHER FEE!


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

nrc said:


> I'm not sure why you don't consider the MSO numbers to be part of Roger's responsibility. While the original loss of DirecTV was outside his control, he has made MSO deals his primary focus since he came on as CEO. To date he hasn't generated enough MSO business to have any impact on the loss of DirecTV subs.
> ..........


 The numbers in MediaLivingRoom's signature, which my post concerned, include D* and standalone cable TiVo subscriptions. Since, as you state above, the large D* losses were outside Rogers' control, these numbers present an exaggerated loss trend that reflects unfairly on Rogers by implication. The standalone trend is bad enough -- no need to pile on just to bash Rogers.


----------



## Speedo123 (Aug 18, 2006)

What will TiVo need to do to keep you as a customer next year?[/QUOTE]

After waiting in vain 3+ years for Verizon to offer expanded DVRs, I finally dumped them for 3 TiVo Premieres which I'll expand when I recover from their initial cost. I find that these units offer considerably more functionallity than the the Verizon units. However, one of the things that the Premieres don't offer is the current channel and time display. A very nice and useful feature. As I recall, the DirecTV units I had prior to switching to FiOS also had this feature. Why doesn't TiVo?  Another "nice to have" option would be the ability to easily get back to a _being viewed _recorded program from the My Shows menu. Might be I just don't yet know how to do it, but although the show is playing in the upper right box, there's no way to get it back to full screen without going through the menu to resume playing. Then it takes you to the point in the show where you hit the menu, rather than to where the show is now at. While these things won't make me leave TiVo, having them sure would make me a more satisfied user!


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

Press the zoom key to get back to full screen.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

dlfl said:


> The numbers in MediaLivingRoom's signature, which my post concerned, include D* and standalone cable TiVo subscriptions. Since, as you state above, the large D* losses were outside Rogers' control, these numbers present an exaggerated loss trend that reflects unfairly on Rogers by implication. The standalone trend is bad enough -- no need to pile on just to bash Rogers.


Those numbers include all MSOs, not just DirecTV. Rogers has placed a tremendous emphasis on MSO deals and he has failed to produce subscriptions sufficient to make any impact against the loss of DirecTV subscribers. That's as much his failure as the loss of standalone subscribers.

Roger's record is what it is. Right now it's a failure. It can still turn around if some of these deals start to pan out, but if the loss of MSO subscribers doesn't start to turn around in the next few quarters then it won't be just forum posters calling for his replacement.


----------



## navyman (Feb 1, 2002)

I've been an ardent Tivo user since 2000, beginning with the Sony SVR-2000, to the SD Directivos, then the last couple of years with the Tivo HDs (2 of them). I'm not sure how many other Tivo lovers have gone the route I have recently in switching to Directv, but it would not surprise me if a substantial number have done so.

Comcast subscription rates, and Tivo sub costs on the Tivo HD's, drove me to consider and accept Directv's sales promotions which brought my monthly TV programming (and DVR recording) costs down significantly. 

The Directv HR-24 units work very well and do some things better than the Tivo HDs (i.e., integrated "now playing" lists, longer buffers, more interactive in many respects, PPV works, etc). The Tivo interface is definitely more intuitive, especially the peanut remote. We still mistake the DVR keys on the Directv remotes for the menu function keys. The HR-24s work very well for Whole house viewing with multiple tuners and they work without the need for bulky multi-cable multiswitches of the old days. It seems Directv has implemented a way to use one coaxial cable from the dish to feed multiple receivers without using traditional multiswitches. Made installation a breeze. Directv has come a long way in producing a competitive DVR compared to Tivo's offerings without costing an arm and a leg. Leasing of the DVRs is a smart business decision by Directv.

I hope Tivo finds a way to compete, but it will require a different business approach.


----------



## samo (Oct 7, 1999)

dlfl said:


> I'm not defending Rogers, but aren't your signature numbers very misleading since they include the loss of DirectTV subscribers?


Would you prefer TiVo owned subs instead?
Jan 2011 - 1,266
Jan 2010 - 1,465
Jan 2009 - 1,654
Jan 2008 - 1,727

Latest churn rate is 3% /month - that is about 35% per year.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

samo said:


> Would you prefer TiVo owned subs instead?
> Jan 2011 - 1,266
> Jan 2010 - 1,465
> Jan 2009 - 1,654
> ...


Yes, those numbers more fairly apply to judging Rogers' performance. That was the point of my first post (#85) on this subject.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

dlfl said:


> The numbers in MediaLivingRoom's signature, which my post concerned, include D* and standalone cable TiVo subscriptions. Since, as you state above, the large D* losses were outside Rogers' control, these numbers present an exaggerated loss trend that reflects unfairly on Rogers by implication. The standalone trend is bad enough -- no need to pile on just to bash Rogers.


Whoa! Those D* losses were most certainly within his control. At a bare minimum, he should have anticipated that and come up with a plan to compensate for the loss. That's what a CEO (and the people who report to him) is supposed to do in a properly functioning company.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

navyman said:


> The Directv HR-24 units work very well and do some things better than the Tivo HDs (i.e., integrated "now playing" lists, longer buffers, more interactive in many respects, PPV works, etc). The Tivo interface is definitely more intuitive, especially the peanut remote. We still mistake the DVR keys on the Directv remotes for the menu function keys. The HR-24s work very well for Whole house viewing with multiple tuners and they work without the need for bulky multi-cable multiswitches of the old days. It seems Directv has implemented a way to use one coaxial cable from the dish to feed multiple receivers without using traditional multiswitches. Made installation a breeze. Directv has come a long way in producing a competitive DVR compared to Tivo's offerings without costing an arm and a leg. Leasing of the DVRs is a smart business decision by Directv.
> 
> I hope Tivo finds a way to compete, but it will require a different business approach.


Glad to hear the HR-24 works -- I hope to ditch my Tivo and get one in a few weeks.

The boxes talk to each other using MoCA. DirecTV didn't invent it. DirecTV used to call their version of it "DECA" (now it's some marketing term). Verizon FIOS also uses MoCA for the same feature. It's perfect for when you just want to occasionally watch a recorded show in another room. Most houses only need two tuners but need several boxes, and having a full fledged DVR in each room gets expensive really quickly (also it's a lot quieter in the bedroom).

Leasing the box is one of the most difficult problems for Tivo to overcome. The lease model is a win-win. The customer gets a replacement (perhaps upgraded) box for free when the DVR dies as well as a low entry price, and the provider gets to write off the equipment depreciation.


----------



## emkorial (Jan 7, 2009)

Lack of on demand. That's ALL that matters. Any idiot can plug in a Tivo and stick a card in a slot. If you can hook up a new HDTV, you can hook up a Tivo. 

But until On Demand is available, the cable compnies will continue to have an advatage peddling thier terriple pile of dung DVR's.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

ZeoTiVo said:


> all of that pales over the one main stumbling block. When I bought into TiVo DVRs a significant nice factor was that I could install them without even giving the cable company a thought. No upgrade to a digital tier needed and no truck roll to have some 3rd party contractor tell me a bunch of BS while sort of making things work.


I agree. When I got my S1, I got Lifetime shortly after. I plugged it in, and I was done. No truck roll needed. (I put my second S1 is on monthly, because I wanted TiVo to have some revenue from me.)

I like my HD, but the cablecard stuff is a real pain.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Speedo123 said:


> What will TiVo need to do to keep you as a customer next year?


After waiting in vain 3+ years for Verizon to offer expanded DVRs, I finally dumped them for 3 TiVo Premieres which I'll expand when I recover from their initial cost. I find that these units offer considerably more functionallity than the the Verizon units. However, one of the things that the Premieres don't offer is the current channel and time display. A very nice and useful feature. As I recall, the DirecTV units I had prior to switching to FiOS also had this feature. Why doesn't TiVo?  Another "nice to have" option would be the ability to easily get back to a _being viewed _recorded program from the My Shows menu. Might be I just don't yet know how to do it, but although the show is playing in the upper right box, there's no way to get it back to full screen without going through the menu to resume playing. Then it takes you to the point in the show where you hit the menu, rather than to where the show is now at. While these things won't make me leave TiVo, having them sure would make me a more satisfied user! [/QUOTE]

When I hit the display button, it shows me the current channel and the current time on the Tv.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

nrc said:


> I think this is a growing trend in the gadget community. Everyone is spec obsessed and unless they can defend their device as the best solution against all comers they're just miserable. "Yeah, this does what I care about better than anything else" is no longer sufficient.


That may be the case with many gadgets, but I think TiVo is suffering from feature loss. Features are going backward, not forward and those that don't come into the forum are surprised when their brand new wiz bang TiVo won't do everything the old one did.

To recap:
SD v HD - Most users don't care about this. All they care about is a decent picture on a device that can record their show. So while it's a nice to have, the main function of a TiVo is to record.

CCI and Macrovision - How many millions of users have been able to record on their S2's and move their recordings to a PC or another TiVo box that now can't? Everyone migrating from an S2 on cable is feeling this bite.

New Menu's - Again the point of a TiVo is to record shows. Adding a fancy HDUI that introduces issues doesn't further the device. A 16:9 SD menu would have sufficed for many people, or at the least an HDUI that didn't have active content.

Then the cable companies knife in the back:
CCI - As mentioned before.

Cable Card - After dragging their feet for almost a decade, the cable companies have made that easy to use device into a nightmare since you need a cable card. And you have to literally beg the cable company to make it work right or admit they offer them.

SDV - A twist of the knife to defeat Cable Card. Waiting until cable card is required, the companies create this new method to deliver more shows at the cost of obsoleting all HD cable card televisions and adding a layer of complexity to already overburdened 3rd party DVR makers. Even the current Tuning Adapters will limit multi-tuner DVR's since they can't accommodate but so many tuners.

Bottom line, TiVo has been out maneuvered at present by the cable companies. They may be able to get back on track with some of these law suits. If they win enough of them they just might be able to get some features back in the settlement. TiVo is no longer the easy to use device it once was.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

emkorial said:


> Lack of on demand. That's ALL that matters. Any idiot can plug in a Tivo and stick a card in a slot. If you can hook up a new HDTV, you can hook up a Tivo.
> 
> But until On Demand is available, the cable compnies will continue to have an advatage peddling thier terriple pile of dung DVR's.


umm - first off - it was the fact that many cable companies require you to schedule a truck roll nad have their idiot come and install it that was the hassle point. So I can not hook up my cable card TiVo if they do not allow self install, which was my point.

also any idiot can get a cable box from the cable company and hook that up to the TV along with the TiVo, after all, on demand does not really need a DVR since it is there when you demand it.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

dlfl said:


> I am just curious what logic (or emotion) is behind the implicit assumption that TiVo's future financial success is of great importance (to anyone other than TiVo and its stockholders), found in some fanboy posts here. Not sayin they are "wrong", just sayin I don't understand their thinking.


Many people, myself included want to record live television and feel the only reliable means of doing that is with a TiVo. How many no sub recorders are their right now that will do HD on all available channels? Yes, there may be a few DVD recorders and maybe one or two VCR's that still work, the the DVR has killed the standalone recorder market and now that we are here, we don't have many options if TiVo goes under. I view TiVo's battle for relevance as TiVo's Alamo. Kind of like watching a train wreck in slow motion.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

ZeoTiVo said:


> umm - first off - it was the fact that many cable companies require you to schedule a truck roll nad have their idiot come and install it that was the hassle point. So I can not hook up my cable card TiVo if they do not allow self install, which was my point.
> 
> also any idiot can get a cable box from the cable company and hook that up to the TV along with the TiVo, after all, on demand does not really need a DVR since it is there when you demand it.


Don't forget the 3-5 trips they have make to get it to work. Also the time window they propose is often all day.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

BobCamp1 said:


> Whoa! Those D* losses were most certainly within his control. At a bare minimum, he should have anticipated that and come up with a plan to compensate for the loss. That's what a CEO (and the people who report to him) is supposed to do in a properly functioning company.


So either Rogers is guilty of gross misfeasance -- or your expectations for his performance are unreasonable. Apparently the TiVo board doesn't agree with you or they would have fired him long ago.

I have no particular motive to defend Rogers but I would hope those who attack him would stick to reasonable expectations and arguments. As I've explained in various previous posts, I don't expect TiVo to be a major factor in my video consumption (which it definitely is now) after about two years from now. But I think TiVo or Rogers only deserve part of the blame for that.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

dlfl said:


> So either Rogers is guilty of gross misfeasance -- or your expectations for his performance are unreasonable. Apparently the TiVo board doesn't agree with you or they would have fired him long ago.


That's a false dilemma. Rogers has simply failed to deliver results from the strategy that he has laid out for TiVo. Does he deserve to be fired? Maybe not today, but certainly if he doesn't start delivering over the next few quarters.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

Stormspace said:


> Many people, myself included want to record live television and feel the only reliable means of doing that is with a TiVo. .............. we don't have many options if TiVo goes under.........


Maybe correct -- but I think more likely incorrect either now or in the near future. TiVo quality and support is trending downward while the quaility of MSO-supplied DVRs is trending up. Here I am referring to basic DVR functions: time shifting and scheduling, which are enough to satisfy many, I dare say most, DVR users.



Stormspace said:


> That may be the case with many gadgets, but I think TiVo is suffering from feature loss. Features are going backward, not forward and those that don't come into the forum are surprised when their brand new wiz bang TiVo won't do everything the old one did.


I have to agree. The Premiere was a step in the right direction but they seem to be lagging in fixing its bugs.



Stormspace said:


> .....SD v HD - Most users don't care about this......


 I think the TV market and broadcasters have spoken differently, and I personally would not want to go back to SD. (On the other hand, I think 3D isn't worth the trouble -- and expense.)



Stormspace said:


> CCI and Macrovision - How many millions of users have been able to record on their S2's and move their recordings to a PC or another TiVo box that now can't? Everyone migrating from an S2 on cable is feeling this bite.


Not "everyone" by far. Actually only 25% to 30% of Series 3 and 4 users are subject to the CCI MRV and TTG limitations. CCI protection does appear to be a slowly growing trend however.


Stormspace said:


> SDV - A twist of the knife to defeat Cable Card. Waiting until cable card is required, the companies create this new method to deliver more shows at the cost of obsoleting all HD cable card televisions and adding a layer of complexity to already overburdened 3rd party DVR makers. Even the current Tuning Adapters will limit multi-tuner DVR's since they can't accommodate but so many tuners.
> 
> .....TiVo has been out maneuvered at present by the cable companies.


Twisting a knife in someone's back wasn't the motive for SDV and you attach too much importance to TiVo if you think the cable cos have had to devote much thought to outmaneuvering TiVo. They are just pursuing their business interests and the effects on TiVo are incidental.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

BobCamp1 said:


> Whoa! Those D* losses were most certainly within his control. At a bare minimum, he should have anticipated that and come up with a plan to compensate for the loss. That's what a CEO (and the people who report to him) is supposed to do in a properly functioning company.





dlfl said:


> So either Rogers is guilty of gross misfeasance -- or your expectations for his performance are unreasonable. Apparently the TiVo board doesn't agree with you or they would have fired him long ago.
> 
> I have no particular motive to defend Rogers but I would hope those who attack him would stick to reasonable expectations and arguments. ..........





nrc said:


> That's a false dilemma. Rogers has simply failed to deliver results from the strategy that he has laid out for TiVo. ..........


Look at BobCamp1's post quoted above. That isn't just an accusation of "simply failed to deliver results....". Note the statement: "At a bare minimum, he should have anticipated that and come up with a plan to compensate for the loss." which implies Rogers didn't meet the "bare minimum" performance requirements. Sounds like the definition of gross misfeasance to me.

Anyway, I don't really care exactly how bad Rogers' performance has been -- I'll leave that debate to others. I just resist people overstating their case.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

dlfl said:


> I think the TV market and broadcasters have spoken differently, and I personally would not want to go back to SD. (On the other hand, I think 3D isn't worth the trouble -- and expense.)


Not really. HD has proliferated because it was mandated, not because people demanded it. What people like in a TV is a large screen at a reasonable price, I think if flat panels had been SD and at the same price points they'd be just as popular.



dlfl said:


> Twisting a knife in someone's back wasn't the motive for SDV and you attach too much importance to TiVo if you think the cable cos have had to devote much thought to outmaneuvering TiVo. They are just pursuing their business interests and the effects on TiVo are incidental.


Come on. Cable companies have been dragging their feet and doing everything they can to stifle third party offerings since those don't offer cable provided VOD. That's always the first thing they tell you when you say you have a TiVo. "You can't get Time Warner Video on Demand, you know".

I don't think they've specifically targeted TiVo, but certainly the cable companies have been moving to a model that precludes recording on any devices but their own.

It's like telling a child to clean his room, and when you go to check the room its clean, but the closet is full of everything. You didn't say to clean the closet. That's what they've been doing, the entire cable industry.

I admit that most of us have moved past it and are waiting for something to change that will fix it, or for the rest of us to wake up and realize what happened while they were sleeping. We are seeing some of these people coming into the forum lately and for us its old news, but they stir it up again. I help some too.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

dlfl said:


> .......Twisting a knife in someone's back wasn't the motive for SDV and you attach too much importance to TiVo if you think the cable cos have had to devote much thought to outmaneuvering TiVo. They are just pursuing their business interests and the effects on TiVo are incidental.





Stormspace said:


> ........Come on. Cable companies have been dragging their feet and doing everything they can to stifle third party offerings since those don't offer cable provided VOD. That's always the first thing they tell you when you say you have a TiVo. "You can't get Time Warner Video on Demand, you know".
> 
> I don't think they've specifically targeted TiVo, but certainly the cable companies have been moving to a model that precludes recording on any devices but their own. ......


What's with the "Come on" remark? I don't see where anything in your response refutes anything I said in my post.  I would point out cable cos have certainly not been doing everything they can to stifle third party offerings. They haven't showered love on us, but they could have made it a lot worse (and done so in spite of the FCC). TiVo is a PITA to them and hurts them financially. Their natural reaction to that is unfortunate for us, but it doesn't make them demons. I am incensed by the way they misrepresent their handling of CableCARD and tuning adapters to the FCC and have filed my remarks with the FCC accordingly.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

The cable companies are crafty enough, they don't skirt the FCC.
I think cable cos walk a fine line when it comes to TiVo.
They do as much as they can to discourage Tivo use but not enough to get sued over it.


----------



## tivogurl (Dec 16, 2004)

dlfl said:


> The Premiere was a step in the right direction but they seem to be lagging in fixing its bugs.


Seem to be? The Premiere was an unfinished product when introduced, and as far as I can tell no significant advance in its HD UI has appeared in the year since its launch. That's not "lagging", that's stone cold stopped. Rather like Moxi, in fact.

Don't get me started on the nasty bugs they haven't fixed and probably never will, or why TiVo still doesn't have an automated migration system for when you upgrade to a new box.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

steve614 said:


> The cable companies are crafty enough, they don't skirt the FCC.
> I think cable cos walk a fine line when it comes to TiVo.
> They do as much as they can to discourage Tivo use but not enough to get sued over it.


That might be a rational management response to the situation, and it may be a defined policy at the hgiher management levels. (I don't really know.) However I have my doubts that they actually care enough about TiVo to spend the mangement effort it would take to implement a "fine line". At least, the wide variation of attitudes and TiVo-related knowledge I experience in TWC reps is inconsistent with such a fine line -- more consistent with very little emphasis on any TiVo-related policy of any kind.


----------



## tomeble (Jan 24, 2009)

Love my TiVos, hope to keep loving them. That said, I would change the following:
- Updates to old units. It is annoying when I am a paid subscriber, and I need to purchase a new unit to get new features. 
- Backups. These things are computers and hard drives die. It's ridiculous that you have to open the box to backup the unit or purchase instantcake. If I buy a Windows/Mac computer, I get the software with it. There's really no reason for TiVo not to do this, since you need an active subscription to use the features anyway. And if they don't want to distribute the software, then there ought to be a backup/restore service as part of the package. For example, all wireless carriers have free apps for backing up and restoring your contacts. After all, the new pricing is modeled after the wireless carriers.
- Internet video on demand needs to be much better.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

dlfl said:


> I am incensed by the way they misrepresent their handling of CableCARD and tuning adapters to the FCC and have filed my remarks with the FCC accordingly.


You got it right there. My meaning was just this.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

tivogurl said:


> Seem to be? The Premiere was an unfinished product when introduced, and as far as I can tell no significant advance in its HD UI has appeared in the year since its launch. That's not "lagging", that's stone cold stopped. Rather like Moxi, in fact.
> 
> Don't get me started on the nasty bugs they haven't fixed and probably never will, or why TiVo still doesn't have an automated migration system for when you upgrade to a new box.


There are bugs in the Series 2's that haven't been fixed. The most annoying of these involves MRV transfers. Sometimes when you set up multiple transfers of programs back to back what you get instead is the first program transfered multiple times. That's been around for years. Happens on the HD as well.

It's becoming more apparent to me that TiVo isn't fixing bugs fast enough to warrant the same kind of faith that they'll ever be fixed that we've had before. So if you are one of those that want that second core activated on a premeire you better wait for a hardware rev that has software to support it.


----------



## cptlapcat (Oct 4, 2007)

steve614 said:


> The cable companies are crafty enough, they don't skirt the FCC.
> I think cable cos walk a fine line when it comes to TiVo.
> They do as much as they can to discourage Tivo use but not enough to get sued over it.


I guess that is why Charter Communications will be providing the Tivo Premeire starting mid year and rollout completed by year end.


----------



## tivogurl (Dec 16, 2004)

Stormspace said:


> So if you are one of those that want that second core activated on a premiere you better wait for a hardware rev that has software to support it.


Why would TiVo enable the second core on new hardware but not on current hardware? The software issues would be the same. If it's not fixed yet, either they never intended to fix it, or they can't. That's why I conclude they're dead in the water as far as enabling multithreaded operation. Of course, the Premiere should never have shipped in such a half-baked state, and its damage to TiVo's reputation is likely irreparable.

Even if the Flash UI (I could have told them that was a serious mistake) can't be multithreaded background things like reordering season passes and To Do list processing should be backgrounded on another thread. That would also improve perceived UI speed.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

cptlapcat said:


> I guess that is why Charter Communications will be providing the Tivo Premeire starting mid year and rollout completed by year end.


It's going to be very interesting to see how this goes. For once we have a cable co and TiVo both wanting TiVo to succeed and (presumably) both willing to take ownership of user problems, rather than leaving the user stranded in between them. Of course, poor management can still torpedo it.

From the NCTA web site, the top ten cable/sat operators:

1 Comcast Corporation 22,937,000 
2 DirecTV 18,934,000 
3 Dish Network Corporation 14,289,000 
4 Time Warner Cable, Inc. 12,551,000 
5 Cox Communications, Inc.1 4,968,000 
6 Charter Communications, Inc. 4,653,000 
7 Verizon Communications, Inc. 3,290,000 
8 Cablevision Systems Corporation 3,043,000 
9 AT&T, Inc. 2,739,000 
10 Bright House Networks LLC1 2,194,000

Although Charter is relatively small, a 25% penetration of their market would give TiVo 1.16M new subscriptions.


----------



## RoyK (Oct 22, 2004)

dlfl said:


> ..
> Although Charter is relatively small, a 25% penetration of their market would give TiVo 1.16M new subscriptions.


And a 100% penetration would give them 4M+ new subscriptions. Both numbers pipe dreams. I'll be surprised if they get 1% penetration if there is any premium charged for TiVos.


----------



## CuriousMark (Jan 13, 2005)

RoyK said:


> And a 100% penetration would give them 4M+ new subscriptions. Both numbers pipe dreams. I'll be surprised if they get 1% penetration if there is any premium charged for TiVos.


I would think a few percent per year is not out of the question. Churn rates alone should make it more than 1%.


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

If I'm not mistaken, TiVo has secured/is securing 100% penetration with the Virgin Media market in the UK.



> TiVo will become the exclusive provider of middleware and user interface software for Virgin Media's next generation set top boxes. Virgin Media will become the exclusive distributor of TiVo services and technology in the United Kingdom.


Edit: According to this article, that's 3.78 million subscribers.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

RoyK said:


> And a 100% penetration would give them 4M+ new subscriptions. Both numbers pipe dreams. I'll be surprised if they get 1% penetration if there is any premium charged for TiVos.


Why so pessimistic? At only 1% penetration, even if TiVo was offered by the five largest MSO's, they would only get about 0.5M new subscriptions. If penetration is actually that low, the MSO deals that TiVo is working on would seem to be doomed to be losers.

Any DVR has a premium cost relative to just a set-top box and I don't think DVR penetration is limited to 1% now.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

dlfl said:


> Look at BobCamp1's post quoted above. That isn't just an accusation of "simply failed to deliver results....". Note the statement: "At a bare minimum, he should have anticipated that and come up with a plan to compensate for the loss." which implies Rogers didn't meet the "bare minimum" performance requirements. Sounds like the definition of gross misfeasance to me.


I always though misfeasance was more of a legal term than a corporate term....

It is possible for the CEO to do a bad job and not get fired. The board of directors is often filled with people who just rubber-stamp whatever the CEO says. They have no business sense -- that's why they hired a CEO. Unless the CEO is obviously and grossly negligent or has done something illegal, the board won't fire the CEO. Some boards are not like this, but most are.

Mr. Rodgers had some indication that the relationship with D* was going sour (if he didn't that's gross negligence) before it was officially terminated. He should have had a new plan for the company going forward to replace this lost revenue. If he did, I couldn't tell what it was. Was it putting Tivo software on existing cable. co. DVRs? Because that's the only different product that Tivo has produced in the last five years. And it was a flop. Is it suing others for patent violation? That requires tons of cash, something which Tivo doesn't have. All Tivo did was to upgrade their existing product so that it could record in HD and add a few half-implemented features.

Even if he had no plan, he should have told the board of directors that the stand-alone DVR market was shrinking, and that the company should be sold while its stock price was still high.

Even though I don't like Apple, you have to admit that they fixed their slumping home computer product by coming up with several new plans and executing them well.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

tivogurl said:


> Why would TiVo enable the second core on new hardware but not on current hardware? The software issues would be the same. If it's not fixed yet, either they never intended to fix it, or they can't. That's why I conclude they're dead in the water as far as enabling multithreaded operation. Of course, the Premiere should never have shipped in such a half-baked state, and its damage to TiVo's reputation is likely irreparable.
> 
> Even if the Flash UI (I could have told them that was a serious mistake) can't be multithreaded background things like reordering season passes and To Do list processing should be backgrounded on another thread. That would also improve perceived UI speed.


You may have a point. I just keep trying to remember the last time anything significant happened that updated older machines with new features. What was the last one we got? kidzone? Since that time I think it's all been joint ventures like Amazon, Netflix, and Blockbuster. Items which the TiVo should be really good at, but are outdone on by cheap appliances like the Roku. Bug fixes have been long in coming, and at least one issue will never be addressed on S3's. An item that some in the forum say was promised by TiVo early on, but that's a whole 'nother discussion.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

BobCamp1 said:


> I always though misfeasance was more of a legal term than a corporate term....


Yeah, not an optimum choice of wording -- maybe "performance below minimum acceptable standards" ?


BobCamp1 said:


> It is possible for the CEO to do a bad job and not get fired. The board of directors is often filled with people who just rubber-stamp whatever the CEO says. They have no business sense -- that's why they hired a CEO. Unless the CEO is obviously and grossly negligent or has done something illegal, the board won't fire the CEO. Some boards are not like this, but most are.
> 
> Mr. Rodgers had some indication that the relationship with D* was going sour (if he didn't that's gross negligence) before it was officially terminated. He should have had a new plan for the company going forward to replace this lost revenue. If he did, I couldn't tell what it was. Was it putting Tivo software on existing cable. co. DVRs? Because that's the only different product that Tivo has produced in the last five years. And it was a flop. Is it suing others for patent violation? That requires tons of cash, something which Tivo doesn't have. All Tivo did was to upgrade their existing product so that it could record in HD and add a few half-implemented features.
> 
> ...


Some generalities and insinuations in there about the Board and Rogers. They may be applicable, and I haven't followed TiVo business news as closely as you probably have. Or this may be a good example of "Monday morning quarterbacking" by an outsider not privy to the various deliberations that occured. Anyway you have made your opinion clear and I respect it.

I also think TiVo has taken a bad path in the last few years. Makes me curious as to how it came about although sometimes knowing the details isn't very satisfying because they are so confusing.


----------



## RoyK (Oct 22, 2004)

dlfl said:


> Why so pessimistic? ...


Because I've been here long enough to see several of these types of things come and fizzle.

But who knows - throw enough darts and one will hit the board sooner or later.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

Stormspace said:


> Don't forget the 3-5 trips they have make to get it to work. Also the time window they propose is often all day.


Tivo could have included the S2 functionality to accept input from a set top box in the S3/HD, and possibly added the ability to control 2 set top boxes. This would have mitigated the cable card fiasco, until the process was ready for prime time. This would have also allowed satellite customers to use a new Tivo. In most cases the input would have to be SD, but the S3/HD does a good job of upscaling SD content.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

BobCamp1 said:


> He should have had a new plan for the company going forward to replace this lost revenue. If he did, I couldn't tell what it was.


I am loving all this armchair CEOing, as if making other plans to get revenue was just a month's work of thought.  We all know what kind of market TiVo is in and we all know that stand alone DVR sales have never taken off - the other companies that have tried are not even around. Heck, even DISH got nowhere fast with their OTA DVR.

MSOs are not exactly having to make their use of TiVo licensed DVRs a rousing sucess either. the second tier MSOs (like COX or Virgin Media) are unique in that they just want a turnkey DVR for as little money as possible. These have just started up.

I also like the belief that if the premiere had dual core and all HD UI that somehow this would have finally made everyone rush out to get one. It would have lifted the initial sales some as more would have upgraded, but to turn the tide on people dropping disposable income items like DVRs, not likely.

so keep throwing from the armchairs, the facts are not in dispute but I just love how folks are acting as if the business environment TiVo is in has little consequence on the results.

PS - Rogers could stay or go from my personal opinion, I know of no one who had any better plans for TiVo.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

cptlapcat said:


> I guess that is why Charter Communications will be providing the Tivo Premeire starting mid year and rollout completed by year end.


My statement was geared toward cable companies that do not/will not make a partnership deal with TiVo.

However, your statement intrigues me. Do you know if the Premiere is going to be offered as standard equipment, or do you have to request it?
In other words, does Charter have their own DVR?

Also, will the Premiere that is offered by Charter have all the features of the stand alone units?


----------



## cptlapcat (Oct 4, 2007)

steve614 said:


> My statement was geared toward cable companies that do not/will not make a partnership deal with TiVo.
> 
> However, your statement intrigues me. Do you know if the Premiere is going to be offered as standard equipment, or do you have to request it?
> In other words, does Charter have their own DVR?
> ...


I believe that the Tivo will be standard equiptment if you want it. My wife won't change from the lousey Charter DVR on her TV (we have four TV's) as she thinks the Tivo DVR is too difficult to learn. The other three TV "will" have Tivo.: up:http://investor.tivo.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=106292&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1518977


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

ZeoTiVo said:


> I am loving all this armchair CEOing, as if making other plans to get revenue was just a month's work of thought.  We all know what kind of market TiVo is in and we all know that stand alone DVR sales have never taken off - the other companies that have tried are not even around. Heck, even DISH got nowhere fast with their OTA DVR.
> 
> MSOs are not exactly having to make their use of TiVo licensed DVRs a rousing sucess either. the second tier MSOs (like COX or Virgin Media) are unique in that they just want a turnkey DVR for as little money as possible. These have just started up.
> 
> ...


I agree that there's no stand-alone DVR market. If there isn't one, then the company needs to shift to a different market(s). It's not easy to do, but not impossible either. Apple makes cell phones and MP3 players now. If I had told you 10 years ago that Apple would be making the best-selling cell phone, you would have laughed at me.

I honestly don't think a well polished Premiere would have helped. It's still way too expensive and difficult to setup. The fact that it doesn't work well is just icing on the cake.

I can only armchair quarterback. It's not my job to lead the company. But then again, my salary and benefits are nowhere near the CEO's and the board of directors'. And what exactly do they get paid all that money for? They are supposed to be making their stock holders lots of money and ensuring the company's future so that they can make even more money. They aren't doing either job well.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

BobCamp1 said:


> I agree that there's no stand-alone DVR market. If there isn't one, then the company needs to shift to a different market(s).
> 
> They are supposed to be making their stock holders lots of money and ensuring the company's future so that they can make even more money. They aren't doing either job well.


You agree that they are in an extremely difficult market segment but then flip flop that he should be making lots of money. Kind of hard to have both.

So they are making MSO deals and surprise, cable companies are difficult and slow to deal with - who here is shocked by that


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

ZeoTiVo said:


> You agree that they are in an extremely difficult market segment but then flip flop that he should be making lots of money. Kind of hard to have both.
> 
> So they are making MSO deals and surprise, cable companies are difficult and slow to deal with - who here is shocked by that


I didn't say that. I said he's getting paid lots of money, as most CEOs are, to steer the company in the right direction. If no one here is shocked that cable companies are slow, then he should have started the MSO deals earlier.

Everyone says that a CEO can't predict the future or deal with unexpected problems. But that's his job. It isn't easy, but that's why he gets paid the big bucks. Considering most companies have a CEO, it's not an impossible task.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

BobCamp1 said:


> I didn't say that. I said he's getting paid lots of money, as most CEOs are, to steer the company in the right direction. If no one here is shocked that cable companies are slow, then he should have started the MSO deals earlier.
> 
> Everyone says that a CEO can't predict the future or deal with unexpected problems. But that's his job. It isn't easy, but that's why he gets paid the big bucks. Considering most companies have a CEO, it's not an impossible task.


most towns have police but there is still crime

anyhow Roger's made the Comcast deal before becoming CEO


> The Comcast deal, completed late Monday, was spearheaded by Tom Rogers, a former executive of NBC Cable, who is now vice chairman of TiVos board. In an interview yesterday, Mr. Rogers said that the economics of the current deal were better for TiVo than the one it had walked away from last year.


I am ambivalent as to wether Roger;s is good or bad at CEO. Just noting in all this armchair CEOing that people throw the theory around but reality is a different place than the armchair, just saying - I have no idea what TiVo should do differently or if it should either.


----------

