# Tivo wants access to AT&T/DirecTV customers



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7522781087

Tivo wants a retail box condition on the pending AT&T/DirecTV merger, since the original 1998 reasons for the DBS waiver no longer apply.

_"None of the reasons previously cited by the Commission for delaying the enforcement ... with respect to these DBS and IPTV MVPDs will apply to the merged company. Moreover ... the merged company would be the largest MVPD in the market rather than a niche player. Hence an explicit path to compliance should be a condition of the merger if it is to be approved."

"The Commission's 1998 forbearance in applying Sections 76.1201-1205 to DIRECTV was based on three factors, taken together: (1) DIRECTV's status as a fledgling competitive entrant, (2) DIRECTV's practice of licensing competitive products and supporting retail devices, and (3) the national footprint of DBS operators. DIRECTV is now the second- largest MVPD and no longer supports any retail devices. The national DBS footprint means that DIRECTV can more easily support retail products than if it were a combination of different regional legacy networks. Hence all three factors evaluated in 1998 and 1999 by the Commission now weigh in favor of, rather than against, requiring effective compliance with Section 629 and explicit compliance with Sections 76.1200-1205 of the Commission's regulations."_

Fighting the good fight... but good luck getting that to happen.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

I want a prohibition of the pending AT&T/DirecTV merger (as well as Comcast/TWC, etc.). But this seems like a good argument for rescinding DirecTV's waiver _now_, never mind after a merger.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Keep in mind Comcast has been one of the more strident supporters of TiVo -- one of the few OnDemand providers for the platform, a commitment to work with TiVo on the next-gen built-in security (CableCARD replacement) solution to provide full access, and they were the group originally hoping to deploy TiVo software on existing set-top boxes. TWC customers using TiVo should be so lucky to have their systems taken over by Comcast.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

dswallow said:


> Keep in mind Comcast has been one of the more strident supporters of TiVo -- one of the few OnDemand providers for the platform, a commitment to work with TiVo on the next-gen built-in security (CableCARD replacement) solution to provide full access, and they were the group originally hoping to deploy TiVo software on existing set-top boxes. TWC customers using TiVo should be so lucky to have their systems taken over by Comcast.


I'm on TWC and I don't want the Comcast merger to go through. The potential risks of such a merger outweigh the possible benefits. My Roamio Plus works just fine on TWC, SDV and all. I get more HD channels on TWC than Comcast customers do. If I want to watch any on-demand content, the TWC Roku app is very good, plus TWC allows the HBOGO and Showtime Roku app to function, whereas Comcast is just being a dick about not allowing that. Thanks, but no thanks.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

tarheelblue32 said:


> I'm on TWC and I don't want the Comcast merger to go through. The potential risks of such a merger outweigh the possible benefits. My Roamio Plus works just fine on TWC, SDV and all. I get more HD channels on TWC than Comcast customers do. If I want to watch any on-demand content, the TWC Roku app is very good, plus TWC allows the HBOGO and Showtime Roku app to function, whereas Comcast is just being a dick about not allowing that. Thanks, but no thanks.


+1 (I think, haha!)


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

BigJimOutlaw said:


> http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7522781087
> 
> Tivo wants a retail box condition on the pending AT&T/DirecTV merger, since the original 1998 reasons for the DBS waiver no longer apply.
> 
> ...


Is TiVo willing to give me a DVR for free, throw in HBO and Sunday Ticket?

Why do they feel the world owes them a business model?


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

BigJimOutlaw said:


> http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7522781087
> 
> Tivo wants a retail box condition on the pending AT&T/DirecTV merger, since the original 1998 reasons for the DBS waiver no longer apply.
> 
> ...


Come to think of it, didn't TiVo successfully sue AT&T for licensing rights?

Now they want to compete against them too? 

Oh, and DirecTV is a "niche player".


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

Banker257 said:


> Why do they feel the world owes them a business model?


Why do DirecTV and AT&T feel they should be exempt from the same laws that the cable companies have to abide by?



Banker257 said:


> Come to think of it, didn't TiVo successfully sue AT&T for licensing rights?


They did. AT&T was violating TiVo's patents.



Banker257 said:


> Now they want to compete against them too?


God forbid we should ever allow any sort of competition.



Banker257 said:


> Oh, and DirecTV is a "niche player".


I'm not even going to bother responding to this one since it is patently absurd.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

tarheelblue32 said:


> Why do DirecTV and AT&T feel they should be exempt from the same laws that the cable companies have to abide by?
> 
> They did. AT&T was violating TiVo's patents.
> 
> ...


Absurd? I agree!

"the merged company would be the largest MVPD in the market rather than a niche player."

Once again, TiVo has a deal with both AT&T and DirecTV why the sudden change of heart?


----------



## pjw150 (May 20, 2014)

tarheelblue32 said:


> I'm on TWC and I don't want the Comcast merger to go through. The potential risks of such a merger outweigh the possible benefits. My Roamio Plus works just fine on TWC, SDV and all. I get more HD channels on TWC than Comcast customers do. If I want to watch any on-demand content, the TWC Roku app is very good, plus TWC allows the HBOGO and Showtime Roku app to function, whereas Comcast is just being a dick about not allowing that. Thanks, but no thanks.


For TWC to allow Roku access, you must be a TWC internet customer. I have TWC cable but get my internet from a DSL provider.

TWC won't allow their programming to go through Roku with that setup.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

Banker257 said:


> Absurd? I agree!
> 
> "the merged company would be the largest MVPD in the market rather than a niche player."
> 
> Once again, TiVo has a deal with both AT&T and DirecTV why the sudden change of heart?


Have you seen the crappy DVR DirecTV allows TiVo to sell to their customers? Why shouldn't someone be able to buy a Roamio that works with DirecTV? Cable customers can because the FCC makes them allow it. DirecTV should have to play by the same rules. As far as AT&T, I'm not aware of any TiVo that works with U-verse.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

pjw150 said:


> For TWC to allow Roku access, you must be a TWC internet customer. I have TWC cable but get my internet from a DSL provider.
> 
> TWC won't allow their programming to go through Roku with that setup.


That's true for the TWC app, but i don't think that's true for the HBOGO and Showtime apps.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

tarheelblue32 said:


> Have you seen the crappy DVR DirecTV allows TiVo to sell to their customers? Why shouldn't someone be able to buy a Roamio that works with DirecTV? Cable customers can because the FCC makes them allow it. DirecTV should have to play by the same rules. As far as AT&T, I'm not aware of any TiVo that works with U-verse.


Who's fault is that? Did DirecTV SUE them and demand they sign the deal they signed?

Do they,or don't they, have licensing agreements they volenterilly signed with AT&T after expensive, lengthy litigation?

This is nothing but "buyers remorse". They settled for peanuts because they were afraid they're almighty patent wouldn't hold up at the supreme court level.

Please don't try to make this out to be about the little guy consumer. This is nothing but TiVo trying to cover their butt for their shortsightedness.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

Banker257 said:


> Who's fault is that? Did DirecTV SUE them and demand they sign the deal they signed?
> 
> Do they,or don't they, have licensing agreements they volenterilly signed with AT&T after expensive, lengthy litigation?
> 
> ...


It's the FCC's fault.

TiVo has very little leverage to negotiate deals with AT&T and the satellite companies. This is what the FCC is supposed to be for. They made the cable companies open up to retail devices, and now they need to make the other MSO players do the same. It should have been done 10 years ago, but still not having it done in 2014 is completely unacceptable.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Those two things are completely different. The deals they made with AT&T and DirecTV were about patent lawsuits. This is them petitioning the FCC to impose the same rules on the merged AT&T/DirecTV company as they impose on every cable company in the US because they will no longer be the niche company they were when they obtained their waiver in 1999. 

Honestly this is something that should have happened a long time ago. DirecTV and Dish got special waivers back in the 90s when CableCARD was being developed because they were new and small. But by the time the integration ban went into effect in 2007 they were just as big, if not bigger, then some of the regional cable companies that were required to comply. The only reason they retain their waiver is because their technology is inherently incompatible with the CableCARD spec. But now that we're moving beyond CableCARDs to downloadable security they should be included along with Dish and every other MVP in the US. Regardless of size.

This is why a gateway type device, like AllVid, would be ideal. Then the security and tuner technology wouldn't matter. They could evolve and change over time without effecting the retail devices.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Dan203 said:


> Those two things are completely different. The deals they made with AT&T and DirecTV were about patent lawsuits. This is them petitioning the FCC to impose the same rules on the merged AT&T/DirecTV company as they impose on every cable company in the US because they will no longer be the niche company they were when they obtained their waiver in 1999.
> 
> Honestly this is something that should have happened a long time ago. DirecTV and Dish got special waivers back in the 90s when CableCARD was being developed because they were new and small. But by the time the integration ban went into effect in 2007 they were just as big, if not bigger, then some of the regional cable companies that were required to comply. The only reason they retain their waiver is because their technology is inherently incompatible with the CableCARD spec. But now that we're moving beyond CableCARDs to downloadable security they should be included along with Dish and every other MVP in the US. Regardless of size.
> 
> This is why a gateway type device, like AllVid, would be ideal. Then the security and tuner technology wouldn't matter. They could evolve and change over time without effecting the retail devices.


I don't need our Government to tell me how to pick a DVR. If I really wanted an option to the Genie, there are plenty of options available today that weren't available when the "integration law" was put into effect.

It's not like DirecTV is overcharging me for what they gve me and if I feel there are I can always leave.

Bottom line is TiVo can't compete against free. ( No I'm not trying to start another 1000 post thread about razors, cell phones, leases and buy to own..)


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

This has nothing to do with the government telling you how to pick a DVR. It's about opening up the market to 3rd party devices so that you have choices. If you want to stick with the "free" genie then you'll still have that option. Just like how cable subscribers still have the option to rent a DVR from their cable company.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

Banker257 said:


> I don't need our Government to tell me how to pick a DVR. If I really wanted an option to the Genie, there are plenty of options available today that weren't available when the "integration law" was put into effect.
> 
> It's not like DirecTV is overcharging me for what they gve me and if I feel there are I can always leave.
> 
> Bottom line is TiVo can't compete against free. ( No I'm not trying to start another 1000 post thread about razors, cell phones, leases and buy to own..)


I'm guessing you're a Republican.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Dan203 said:


> This has nothing to do with the government telling you how to pick a DVR. It's about opening up the market to 3rd party devices so that you have choices. If you want to stick with the "free" genie then you'll still have that option. Just like how cable subscribers still have the option to rent a DVR from their cable company.


I don't want another Cable Card fiasco. Leave me and the rest of us 99%ers that are extremely happy with the way things are out of it.

If TiVo wants to compete with DirecTV let them put a satellite into space and start their own MSO service. I bet you they sing a different tune then! 

Let's be honest, does TiVo really have MY best interests at heart with this filing?


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

tarheelblue32 said:


> I'm guessing you're a Republican.


I'm guessing your looking for an unrelated argument. What's your point?

You going to berate me because of my supposed religion, too?


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

Banker257 said:


> I'm guessing your looking for an unrelated argument. What's your point?
> 
> You going to berate me because of my supposed religion, too?


I meant no offense. I was merely observing that all your posts seem to indicate one particular perspective on these issues that I tend to disagree with.


----------



## jwbelcher (Nov 13, 2007)

tarheelblue32 said:


> I'm guessing you're a Republican.


More likely an NCTA employee.


----------



## kokishin (Sep 9, 2014)

Banker257 said:


> Is TiVo willing to give me a DVR for free, throw in HBO and Sunday Ticket?
> 
> Why do they feel the world owes them a business model?


Didn't you have to agree to a two year commit with Directv to get your "free" DVR?


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> I don't want another Cable Card fiasco. Leave me and the rest of us 99%ers that are extremely happy with the way things are out of it.


My past 8 years with multiple providers and multiple CableCARDs have gone without incident, where would the fiasco be?


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

dswallow said:


> TWC customers using TiVo should be so lucky to have their systems taken over by Comcast.


As invested in TiVo as I am, I still have larger concerns. I don't see any way that merger is good for the country.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

So this is the "cablecard waiver", right? If so, I've been saying that should have gone away a long time ago..


----------



## moedaman (Aug 21, 2012)

Banker257 said:


> I don't want another Cable Card fiasco. Leave me and the rest of us 99%ers that are extremely happy with the way things are out of it.


Nobody has been forced to use 3rd party cable card devices over provider devices. What do you have against people being able to make a choice?


tarheelblue32 said:


> I'm guessing you're a Republican.


I'm a Republican for the most part and I completely disagree with him too. So comments about party affiliation should be kept out of this discussion.


jwbelcher said:


> More likely an NCTA employee.


This might be the correct answer.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Banker257 said:


> I don't want another Cable Card fiasco. Leave me and the rest of us 99%ers that are extremely happy with the way things are out of it.
> 
> If TiVo wants to compete with DirecTV let them put a satellite into space and start their own MSO service. I bet you they sing a different tune then!
> 
> Let's be honest, does TiVo really have MY best interests at heart with this filing?


The only reason CableCARDs were a fiasco is because the cable companies did everything they could to make them as difficult to install and use as possible. Plus they delayed the integration ban for years, and when it finally kcked in they ignored the spirit of the law by making consumer CCs and cable boxes with CCs use a completely different activation process.

But even with all that if CCs are still the only reason we have options. If it weren't for the. We wouldn't have not only TiVo, but Ceton, HDHomeRun, etc... And without those options we'd likely have DVRs that forced us to watch ads, had time limits on how long shows could be stored, etc... Those are both real things the MSOs tried to get forced on us and only government intervention and opposition from companies like TiVo and consumer advocacy groups like the EFF kept them from happening.

This case is more akin to the Ma Bell case where the FCC forced them to allow 3rd party phones to function on their network. Without that we never would have gotten answering machines, cordless phones or maybe even not the cell phone. Forcing these functional monopolies to allow 3rd party devices to access their network is the only way to foster compeition, and without compeition there would be no innovation.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Dan203 said:


> The only reason CableCARDs were a fiasco is because the cable companies did everything they could to make them as difficult to install and use as possible. Plus they delayed the integration ban for years, and when it finally kcked in they ignored the spirit of the law by making consumer CCs and cable boxes with CCs use a completely different activation process.


I'm not really trying to be argumentative, but what exactly do you mean? Do you expect people with regular cable boxes to get the same cablecard activation screen and have to call in?

It makes sense for them to be able to make it "automagic" with their own equipment.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

mattack said:


> I'm not really trying to be argumentative, but what exactly do you mean? Do you expect people with regular cable boxes to get the same cablecard activation screen and have to call in?


Yes, that would have been ideal if the FCC had forced them to do that. If the cable company installers (or subscribers if self-installing) had to insert a CableCard into a cable box and call to activate it every time they installed a cable box for a customer, then they would at least know how to do it and cable companies would have had an incentive to make the process as easy and foolproof as possible.


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> Who's fault is that? Did DirecTV SUE them and demand they sign the deal they signed?
> 
> Do they,or don't they, have licensing agreements they volenterilly signed with AT&T after expensive, lengthy litigation?
> 
> ...


Sure, DirecTV has licensed lots of TiVo technology (without being sued), they just haven't implemented it very well. In 7 years of using DirecTV DVRs I have never been able to get trick play to work as smoothly as a TiVo. Check out the DirecTV forums at DBSForums and you'll find just as many problems reported as you do here. The Genie had a bug early this year that automatically deleted a recording if you exited it in the middle. Every so often a software update wipes ALL recordings (that one happened to us last year).

The HR44 is the ONLY DirecTV DVR that isn't abysmally slow. But the other DVRs were fast when they were new too. As they add features to the software, the DVRs all slow down. And DirecTV doesn't give out free upgrades very often...if you are an HR34 owner (the top of the line 18 months ago) it will cost you $299 to upgrade to an HR44. You will also lose all your recordings since you can't transfer anything off a DirecTV DVR.

As for the THR-22 (the current DirecTiVo), it was DirecTV that directed that it be crippled, since they didn't want it to compete with their own DVRs. It is worth noting, however, that TiVo software runs circles around DirecTV's software on the same hardware.

DirecTV is a fine service, but it is not cheap and their DVRs are at least as buggy (and less functional) than TiVos.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Banker257 said:


> I don't need our Government to tell me how to pick a DVR. If I really wanted an option to the Genie, there are plenty of options available today that weren't available when the "integration law" was put into effect.
> 
> It's not like DirecTV is overcharging me for what they gve me and if I feel there are I can always leave.
> 
> Bottom line is TiVo can't compete against free. ( No I'm not trying to start another 1000 post thread about razors, cell phones, leases and buy to own..)


No matter how you slice it... the Directv DVRs are not FREE... they may have duped you into thinking that but it's not even remotely true.

Tivo absolutely can compete but you've drank to much of the D* KoolAid and can't see it.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

tarheelblue32 said:


> I'm guessing you're a Republican.


If he is... then he's a very backwards one. Why wouldn't a Republican want competition. I believe that they are for the free enterprise system.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

mattack said:


> Do you expect people with regular cable boxes to get the same cablecard activation screen and have to call in?


Yes. Although really, I'd prefer it if the cablecos added an IP-accessible backchannel that would allow any equipment to connect and auto-setup. Whatever... the main thing is that the experience of hooking up a cable-company-supplied box and a third-party box ought to be close to the same.



> _It makes sense for them to be able to make it "automagic" with their own equipment._


It makes sense for them. But it guts the regulation of all force.


----------



## Series3Sub (Mar 14, 2010)

This is an issue for the rich. Whether we like it or not, the MVPD provided equipment at NO UPFRONT COST (often as high as $800 per household as stated in Quarterly Reports) is the ONLY path for the vast majority of pay TV consumers. I'm not interested in messing with specs that would be very difficult to change due to 3rd parties not wanting to bear the cost of the change. Unfortunately, the reason DBS still beats cable with the best DVR and Whole Home options along with a host of other features that cable does NOT have, is precisely because DBS can upgrade the tech without any concern of making 3rd party boxes obsolete.

I offer as an example the coming full MPEG4 change to all the cable co. This will cause many TiVo Series 3 owners with limited options and *ALL at the expense* of the poor TiVo consumer who shelled out $800 for the S3 648 , and nearly as much for the HDXL.

Contrast this, first, DirecTV, who changed out ALL necessary equipment for all its subscribers using DirecTV equipment, again, all at DircTV's expense. Oh, those poor TiVo folks were not so generously provided for. As for Dish, they paid for every penny of expense to move its HD subscribers from MPEG2 to MPEG4. BTW, Dish did license both Phillips and JVC to sell Dish compatible boxes at retail for its SD STB's. This change over not only paid for new MPEG4 boxes, multiple boxes in one home, for example, but the total cost to change current HD subscribers to the new satellite for most HD services, and that was expensive labor, new reflectors, new LNBF's and new switches, and new cabling, if necessary. What is bad about that? Had we had 3rd party boxes we would have been on our own, or, even worse, NO new HD services for quite some time because the 3rd party folks would resist the change that would make their boxes BRICKS for HD.

The irony is the MVPD provided equipment is the most PRO-consumer model of all. We KNOW the high cost a real LACK of support from TiVo's own actions when it comes to how 3rd parties would handle any change in tech that is sweeping: YOU pay for it. That is quite anit-cosumer. But the Marie Antoinettes of the third party/TiVo world would get the expensive toys and candy they crave while negatively affecting everyone else. And the need for a TiVo might be severe for the cable co's who, ironically, support 3rd parties (Moxie used to be retail along with a few others) like TiVo, and that model is a really poor real-world reality of the 3rd party notion, but the two DBS services have surpassed TiVo in innovation and overall whole home DVR's, so the notion of superior STB's that will come from third parties just no longer applies. And frankly, there really arent 3rd parties, in the plural, but just ONE: TiVo. The well designed Moxi and a few others had to throw in the towel as retail 3rd party boxes for MSO's, not because their products were bad, but because that pricing model no longer makes sense, otherwise, TiVo would be making up 50% of the MSO STB's in homes. And it is not because TiVo is a bad product. Cable consumers have been voting with their pocketbooks, despite their desire for the superior TiVo products (compared to the MSO's), because the 3rd party pricing model makes no economic sense, except for the very affluent and wealthy who enjoy such privileges. Please, TiVo's retail numbers, and even its MSO products--which require ADDITIONAL fees because TiVo is another party who needs their share of the $$$, are puny, and no one is even in the slightest interested in buying TiVo, a common way of eliminating patent violation lawsuits because it makes no business sense.

If and when TiVo dies, it might be a sad day because the company and device was one of three DVR's to first hit the market, and it was, overall, the best, and it had great marketing, and TiVo did everything pretty much right (well, except their requirements that the MVPD's pay for just about EVERYTHING if they wanted to partner with TiVo), except it was a 3rd party destined to be not what it could because it was far less expensive for MSO's and DBS' to make their own DVR's (at first, NOT nearly as good as TiVo's) they could afford to give subscribers at no up-front cost and, over time, exceed TiVo's in features and innovation, although TiVo is a very solid #3. TiVo wants the government to support a no longer rational business model that does NOTHING to bring DVR technology into MORE homes nor does the business model do anything for those who can least afford a DVR, unlike the MVPD's who do have the MANY pieces of equipment, and UPGRADES of new tech for DBS, to support a family and their use of DVR in multiple rooms at at multiple TV's, all at no up front cost with all the same, or even better, TiVo features. Sorry, but the Market has spoken. The 3rd party model is just for the rich, who want the government to support a failed business model.

Finally, at least for DBS, far better upgrade paths that include not just the latest tech boxes, but all the periphery equipment to support it and any labor costs, as well. Also, Cable cos improvements on DVR and services and DBS's superior to MSO equipment is NOT because the 3rd party box (TiVo, etc.) has any effect upon innovation at the MVPD's: it has absolutely NONE! The superior DBS systems and features and cables better than before offerings are all due to competition AMONG the MVPD's themselves. They are responding to each other, not at all to any 3rd party boxes such as TiVo. 3rd party boxes are just not relevant in affecting the market, not matter how good the box may be.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

tarheelblue32 said:


> Yes, that would have been ideal if the FCC had forced them to do that. If the cable company installers (or subscribers if self-installing) had to insert a CableCard into a cable box and call to activate it every time they installed a cable box for a customer, then they would at least know how to do it and cable companies would have had an incentive to make the process as easy and foolproof as possible.


Exactly!!!

The setup process for consumer devices was completely different and often times the installers, and the people they called on the phone, had no idea how to set them up correctly because they received little or no training on how to do it. The process has gotten better in recent years, but there is still an element of luck of the draw when it comes to who you get on the phone.

No such issues exist for cable company equipment because they use a completely different system and are preactivated before they leave the office.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Series3Sub said:


> This is an issue for the rich. Whether we like it or not, the MVPD provided equipment at NO UPFRONT COST (often as high as $800 per household as stated in Quarterly Reports) is the ONLY path for the vast majority of pay TV consumers. I'm not interested in messing with specs that would be very difficult to change due to 3rd parties not wanting to bear the cost of the change. Unfortunately, the reason DBS still beats cable with the best DVR and Whole Home options along with a host of other features that cable does NOT have, is precisely because DBS can upgrade the tech without any concern of making 3rd party boxes obsolete.
> 
> I offer as an example the coming full MPEG4 change to all the cable co. This will cause many TiVo Series 3 owners with limited options and *ALL at the expense* of the poor TiVo consumer who shelled out $800 for the S3 648 , and nearly as much for the HDXL.
> 
> ...


This is what I meant by my "Cable Card" fiasco comment. All it accomplished was making the Cable Box more expensive.

I don't need/nor want to subsidize a company so 1% of the population can think they're saving a couple of bucks by "buying" equipment.

If TiVo wants to compete they never should have signed deals and took their money.

Now they're crying "no fair" and want the government to bail them out.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

magnus said:


> No matter how you slice it... the Directv DVRs are not FREE... they may have duped you into thinking that but it's not even remotely true.
> 
> Tivo absolutely can compete but you've drank to much of the D* KoolAid and can't see it.


Ok, so how much did DirectTV charge me for 3 DVR's and installation?


----------



## jwbelcher (Nov 13, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> This is what I meant by my "Cable Card" fiasco comment. All it accomplished was making the Cable Box more expensive.
> 
> I don't need/nor want to subsidize a company so 1% of the population can think they're saving a couple of bucks by "buying" equipment.
> 
> ...


Wow, and lets throw in the energy efficiency argument while your at it.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

jwbelcher said:


> Wow, and lets throw in the energy efficiency argument while your at it.


Since you brought it up!


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

Still conflating patent licensing with FCC regulations. Stretching logic for the sake of argument. Don't feed the troll, and all that stuff.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

Series3Sub said:


> Contrast this, first, DirecTV, who changed out ALL necessary equipment for all its subscribers using DirecTV equipment, again, all at DircTV's expense.


Um...no. DirecTV tried to charge me $200 to replace my HR10-250 with the HR20. This was after I had already paid $200 for the HR10-250 in the first place. Luckily my contract allowed me to return the equipment and cancel service at no cost. I see those provisions are long gone from DBS contracts these days.


----------



## tatergator1 (Mar 27, 2008)

Banker257 said:


> Ok, so how much did DirectTV charge me for 3 DVR's and installation?


Upfront, probably nothing. They'll simply recoup that cost by charging you a monthly bill that includes at least $10 more per month for your TV package than it would had those DVR's not been "free." Since they were "free," I assume you're also locked into a 2-year contract with DIRECTV, with the monthly cost increasing by another $10 or more for the second year.

Some people are fine with month-to-month fees. Others prefer to do the math and pay higher upfront costs to achieve a lower long-term cost.


----------



## jcthorne (Jan 28, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> Ok, so how much did DirectTV charge me for 3 DVR's and installation?


If you can't see that you are PAYING for it every month when you send the check to fulfill your years of indenture (contract), then arguing the point is a lost cause.

Your belief that D* has your interest at heart and provides all this 'free' equipment is very hard to reason with. WAKE UP.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

jcthorne said:


> If you can't see that you are PAYING for it every month when you send the check to fulfill your years of indenture (contract), then arguing the point is a lost cause.
> 
> Your belief that D* has your interest at heart and provides all this 'free' equipment is very hard to reason with. WAKE UP.


Gee, all this time I thought I was sending them a check for Television Service. I didn't know the contract changed that! Thanks!!!


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

tatergator1 said:


> Upfront, probably nothing. They'll simply recoup that cost by charging you a monthly bill that includes at least $10 more per month for your TV package than it would had those DVR's not been "free." Since they were "free," I assume you're also locked into a 2-year contract with DIRECTV, with the monthly cost increasing by another $10 or more for the second year.
> 
> Some people are fine with month-to-month fees. Others prefer to do the math and pay higher upfront costs to achieve a lower long-term cost.


So the hardware was free, right? 

By the way, I should let you guys know that my bill actually went DOWN after the upgrades.


----------



## daveak (Mar 23, 2009)

Banker257 said:


> So the hardware was free, right?
> 
> By the way, I should let you guys know that my bill actually went DOWN after the upgrades.


My last subsidized phone with AT&T was the same way, I got a $600 phone for $99 and 2 year commitment tha penalized me for early withdraw from the contract. Of course, I was only paying for the phone service... AT&T (because they are such great altruistic company) ate the $501 for my benefit and well being. My bill actually did go down a bit as well. Kudos to AT&T, free and greatly discounted phones for all! And you only pay for the phone service every month.


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

Banker257 said:


> So the hardware was free, right?
> 
> By the way, I should let you guys know that my bill actually went DOWN after the upgrades.


Care to post a scan of your bill? (with any personally-identifying-info redacted, of course)


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

daveak said:


> My last subsidized phone with AT&T was the same way, I got a $600 phone for $99 and 2 year commitment tha penalized me for early withdraw from the contract. Of course, I was only paying for the phone service... AT&T (because they are such great altruistic company) ate the $501 for my benefit and well being. My bill actually did go down a bit as well. Kudos to AT&T, free and greatly discounted phones for all! And you only pay for the phone service every month.


So you paid the $501 after paying $99 with a two year commitment PLUS your monthly service bill?


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

gonzotek said:


> Care to post a scan of your bill? (with any personally-identifying-info redacted, of course)


If I thought it would change the ridiculous "free hardware is not really free" arguments I would, but we both know that will never happen.


----------



## tatergator1 (Mar 27, 2008)

Banker257 said:


> So the hardware was free, right? [\QUOTE]
> 
> No, the cost of the hardware was subsidized by an inflated monthly TV service cost. You've simply financed the cost of the DVRs by agreeing to a 2-year contract at a TV service cost which has been inflated to allow DTV to recoup the equipment costs by the end of 2 years.
> 
> ...


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Series3Sub said:


> This is an issue for the rich. Whether we like it or not, the MVPD provided equipment at NO UPFRONT COST (often as high as $800 per household as stated in Quarterly Reports) is the ONLY path for the vast majority of pay TV consumers. I'm not interested in messing with specs that would be very difficult to change due to 3rd parties not wanting to bear the cost of the change. Unfortunately, the reason DBS still beats cable with the best DVR and Whole Home options along with a host of other features that cable does NOT have, is precisely because DBS can upgrade the tech without any concern of making 3rd party boxes obsolete.
> 
> I offer as an example the coming full MPEG4 change to all the cable co. This will cause many TiVo Series 3 owners with limited options and *ALL at the expense* of the poor TiVo consumer who shelled out $800 for the S3 648 , and nearly as much for the HDXL.
> 
> ...


Lots of hogwash. Since when does saving money in the long run only belong to the wealthy and affluent?? That's bs.

The poor SEries 3 owner hasn't made a monthly $15 payment in 7 years. Don't feel sorry for him.

And don't act like new boxes don't cost you money on Satellite. You act like someone paying a $15/month fee for a box in perpetuity is the same as that person getting it for free.

YOu're only good point is that having a viable 3rd party set top box market would bring a new set of problems that satellite hasn't had to deal with when it comes to upgrading their tech. But when my Series 2 essentially became obsolete I upgraded. It had a good run. I wouldn't have done better leasing a box from the cable co.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

tatergator1 said:


> Banker257 said:
> 
> 
> > So the hardware was free, right? [\QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

tatergator1 said:


> Banker257 said:
> 
> 
> > So the hardware was free, right? [\QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

trip1eX said:


> Lots of hogwash. Since when does saving money in the long run only belong to the wealthy and affluent?? That's bs.
> 
> The poor SEries 3 owner hasn't made a monthly $15 payment in 7 years. Don't feel sorry for him.
> 
> ...


How much less for TV service do you pay per month since you "own" your own equipment?


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

It's always nice to save money, but I don't base my choice of using TiVo on the cost; I base it on the user experience and reliability. When it's also cheaper, that's a bonus.

With the latest TiVo Roamio and the changes to the payment model for the TiVo mini, it's pretty easy for a multi-device household to save money pretty quickly, though.

Traditionally with cable services there were always ways to get at least a subset of channels with no equipment from the cable company (yes that is changing to some extent). There've basically never been such ways with satellite providers, since some sort of tuner and authorization is always required, and they've always charged for that (though some top-tier packages would sometimes simply include some large number of "additional outlets" at no additional monthly charge above the monthly charge for the top-tier package -- in other words, you were still paying, it just wasn't so easily broken out exactly how much).

If there were a viable market for third-party devices that could work with programming and services provided via satellite services like DirecTV or IP services like AT&T, there would be companies serving that market. What's required is simply the same thing that is required of most cable companies -- access to the authentication system for the service network, be that be by a CableCARD-like device, or via some authentication algorithm utilizing digitally managed certificates, just some way for a third party to be able to utilize some system that is compatible with the provider and allows the provider to authenticate and authorize the services for the subscriber using it.

There is no good reason that these services should not be mandated to provide that level of access to third-party devices. Actually, technically they are required to do so, but simply have been granted a waiver so they don't have to comply for the time being. It's time for such waivers to come to an end.

It doesn't mean there's going to be any increased cost to the providers, or that they'll have to change out existing equipment at their cost. There's still going to be a tuner involved. There's still going to be some digital decoding involved. This is just providing third-party devices with a usable standard so they can have access to and utilize the same signals that the subscribers pay for today, but providing the subscriber with alternative choices -- market-driven choices.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

TiVos are typically more expensive then cable DVRs over the short term (2-3) years, so if you're only looking at it from a cost perspective then a TiVo is probably not for you. I use TiVo because it offers features the DVR offered by my cable company does not. Things like multi-room viewing, the ability to download shows to my iPad or PC, and OTT apps like Netflix, Amazon, etc... I'm willing to pay extra, and forgo access to VOD, for those features. And people with DirecTV should have the same option.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> tatergator1 said:
> 
> 
> > So If I pay the up front cost of $800 for the equipment DirecTV didn't give me for free, my monthly bill will be even cheaper?
> ...


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

dswallow said:


> It's always nice to save money, but I don't base my choice of using TiVo on the cost; I base it on the user experience and reliability. When it's also cheaper, that's a bonus.
> 
> With the latest TiVo Roamio and the changes to the payment model for the TiVo mini, it's pretty easy for a multi-device household to save money pretty quickly, though.
> 
> ...


Doesn't TiVo already have access to DirecTV? Didn't they sign a "contract" of their own free will and are compensated for said "contract"?


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Dan203 said:


> TiVos are typically more expensive then cable DVRs over the short term (2-3) years, so if you're only looking at it from a cost perspective then a TiVo is probably not for you. I use TiVo because it offers features the DVR offered by my cable company does not. Things like multi-room viewing, the ability to download shows to my iPad or PC, and OTT apps like Netflix, Amazon, etc... I'm willing to pay extra, and forgo access to VOD, for those features. And people with DirecTV should have the same option.


The people with DirecTV DO have the same options. I already have access to all that.

Except maybe Netflix, but I have a Roku, Blueray Player, AppleTV, Xbox, and even a Wii for that.

Throw in that I have a Harmony One remote and TiVo's silly "owning input 1" dream makes no sense at all.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

ncted said:


> Banker257 said:
> 
> 
> > That used to be the case. DirecTV and Dish didn't used to have equipment fees, but you paid up-front for the STBs. When they broke when out of warranty, you had to buy a new one. Customers complained, so they moved to a "lease" model. Unfortunately, even if you buy your Dish/DirecTV equipment these days, you still pay the fee for using the equipment.
> ...


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Banker257 said:


> The people with DirecTV DO have the same options. I already have access to all that.
> 
> Except maybe Netflix, but I have a Roku, Blueray Player, AppleTV, Xbox, and even a Wii for that.
> 
> Throw in that I have a Harmony One remote and TiVo's silly "owning input 1" dream makes no sense at all.


While DirecTV might offer their own DVRs with similar functionality you don't actually have a choice to use any equipment except the equipment they allow. The purpose of these standards is to open up the market to 3rd party retail devices and spur innovation. It hasn't worked all that great with CableCARDs because of the poor implementation, but even with just TiVo and a few MCE tuner makers in the game we've still got some stuff we never would have and prevented some stuff (like forced commercials) that might have otherwise come to be.

I still don't get your aversion to this. It's great you're happy with what DirecTV offers, but how does this effect that? Cable company offerings have not changed at all (except maybe for the better) because of CableCARDs. All CableCARDs have done is give consumers options.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

Banker257 said:


> Can you call you're MSO and ask them to credit you that fee because "your'e bringing your own equipment"?


Absolutely you can. The FCC requires cable companies to give you a user-owned equipment credit if the equipment rental fees are included in the price of your television package.



Banker257 said:


> This reminds of the guys that go to AutoZone and buy their own brake pads, bring it to their local guy to install for them, and then get pissed when the guy won't install them, or give them a discount for taking money out of his pocket.


There is absolutely nothing wrong with someone doing that, and nothing wrong with a mechanic refusing to do it, because there is an actual competitive market for mechanic services. There are literally hundreds of mechanics I could go to within a few miles of my house, and some of them will be happy to install brake pads I bought myself. The difference here is that there is only 1 cable company that provides TV service to my house. Monopolies (or near monopolies) require government regulation and intervention because by definition the "free market" does not operate properly when you only have only one or a small number of choices.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Banker257 said:


> Doesn't TiVo already have access to DirecTV? Didn't they sign a "contract" of their own free will and are compensated for said "contract"?


I don't think the actual contract terms have ever been disclosed, but it would seem that DirecTV simply contracted TiVo to create an updated model which they make available; it's not really a full third-party relationship/unfettered access to the signal via a supported authentication scheme like it is with CableCARD-based systems, so DirecTV is likely still directly involved and controlling the product (i.e., restricting OTT support for other apps on the device, for instance).


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Dan203 said:


> While DirecTV might offer their own DVRs with similar functionality you don't actually have a choice to use any equipment except the equipment they allow. The purpose of these standards is to open up the market to 3rd party retail devices and spur innovation. It hasn't worked all that great with CableCARDs because of the poor implementation, but even with just TiVo and a few MCE tuner makers in the game we've still got some stuff we never would have and prevented some stuff (like forced commercials) that might have otherwise come to be.
> 
> I still don't get your aversion to this. It's great you're happy with what DirecTV offers, but how does this effect that? Cable company offerings have not changed at all (except maybe for the better) because of CableCARDs. All CableCARDs have done is give consumers options.


One of my aversions is I don't want to have to deal with Customer Service that has no idea what I'm talking about when I call with a problem because they also have to deal with 3rd party equipment.

I'm not tech savvy like most of the TiVo owners here and I really don't care to learn. I just want to record TV as cheaply as possible. I have no aspirations to "sell my DVR on Ebay" or "replace the HD" when it dies.

I don't care if I can't record 3 years of crap I'll never watch. If it's unwatched on my list for more than a week it gets deleted, no questions asked. don't care how much room is left.

As far as my experience with TiVO:

The market has been open for what? 10 years? There is basically only ONE business that insists on making the general public, who couldn't care less about their product, continually blame everyone else for their failures.

When my brand new Premiere was DOA out of the box, they told me it was FIOS' fault. When FIOS called them on it, they blamed the CableCard When I called them on that, they blamed my internet connection, router, signal strength, etc. etc. etc.

They refused to own up to their shoddy product and got down right nasty when I demanded my money back. (which by the way, I never got).

Their answer was to send me a refurb with a dented case. Which i promptly threw in the trash.

That being said, I LOVED my old Series 2.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

dswallow said:


> I don't think the actual contract terms have ever been disclosed, but it would seem that DirecTV simply contracted TiVo to create an updated model which they make available; it's not really a full third-party relationship/unfettered access to the signal via a supported authentication scheme like it is with CableCARD-based systems, so DirecTV is likely still directly involved and controlling the product (i.e., restricting OTT support for other apps on the device, for instance).


Why shouldn't they be controlling the product? Don't they have a contract they BOTH signed of (supposedly) their own free will?

Just because one of the parties is having buyers remorse doesn't mean the Government needs to get involved.

This is beyond ridiculous. Doesn't a contract mean anything anymore?


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

Banker257 said:


> Why shouldn't they be controlling the product? Don't they have a contract they BOTH signed of (supposedly) their own free will?
> 
> Just because one of the parties is having buyers remorse doesn't mean the Government needs to get involved.
> 
> This is beyond ridiculous. Doesn't a contract mean anything anymore?


You keep confusing the issue with this line. DirecTV's network should be open to anyone who wants to manufacture a device, not just companies that DirecTV has agreed to sign a contract with. If there were a single, open standard across cable, satellite, and IPTV, then hardware makers like Samsung would probably be interested in making retail devices for it. And for a single standard to ever happen would require government intervention. The free market would never do it.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Banker257 said:


> One of my aversions is I don't want to have to deal with Customer Service that has no idea what I'm talking about when I call with a problem because they also have to deal with 3rd party equipment.


You wouldn't HAVE to do that. 3rd party equipment is optional. You could still get your Genie directly from DirecTV just like you do now. With CableCARDs there was zero change with regards to the user experience when getting a box directly from the cable company. They technically had CableCARDs inside but the user didn't have to deal with them, they were setup entirely by the tech who came to install the boxes. Only if you chose to buy a 3rd party device did you have to deal with setting up the CableCARD.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Dan203 said:


> You wouldn't HAVE to do that. 3rd party equipment is optional. You could still get your Genie directly from DirecTV just like you do now. With CableCARDs there was zero change with regards to the user experience when getting a box directly from the cable company. They technically had CableCARDs inside but the user didn't have to deal with them, they were setup entirely by the tech who came to install the boxes. Only if you chose to buy a 3rd party device did you have to deal with setting up the CableCARD.


And there was no extra cost added to the people using the Cable Cos box for the extra hardware?

I only ask because I read that a Cable Card added $50 to the cost of a Cable Box. Is this not true?

Or doesn't it matter since the Cable Cos just "built it into the monthy price"?


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Banker257 said:


> How much less for TV service do you pay per month since you "own" your own equipment?


For 6 tuners and 3 tvs I paid $800. Roamio Plus for $600 and 2 Minis at less than $100 each. So $266/yr for 3 years. That's $22/mo for 3 years. AFter that I pay no fees and own the equipment and its resale value. Cablecard fee for me is $4/mo so $48/yr or $144 over 3 years. Total with cc would be $944/3 years.

DTV is $33/mo for 3 tvs and 5 tuners. Or $396/yr. OR $1188 for 3 years. If there are taxes on the $33/mo then it would run ~$2/mo for most.

They do run deals where they waive the $15/mo advanced service fee for the 1st year. In that case it would be $216 for the 1st yr. And $396/yr after that. Or $1008 for 3 years. IN any case, with DTV you get the privilege of continuing to pay fees in year 4 and beyond.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Banker257 said:


> And there was no extra cost added to the people using the Cable Cos box for the extra hardware?
> 
> I only ask because I read that a Cable Card added $50 to the cost of a Cable Box. Is this not true?
> 
> Or doesn't it matter since the Cable Cos just "built it into the monthy price"?


It did not effect the cost of cable boxes to the user, at least not in my area. I'm sure it came into play when it was time for one of their standard price increases, but the actual cost of renting a box did not change. It was just absorbed into the overall service cost. Which is exactly what's happening now with your "free" Genie.

The main reason the providers are pushing back against a universal standard is not because of cost or technological limitations, it's because they like having you locked into their service by the equipment. They like that moving to another service requires you to get and learn all new equipment because it makes you less likely to jump ship even if the other guy offers you a better deal.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

trip1eX said:


> For 6 tuners and 3 tvs I paid $800. So $266/yr for 3 years. That's $22/mo for 3 years. AFter that I pay no fees and own the equipment and its resale value. Cablecard fee for me is $4/mo so $48/yr or $144 over 3 years. Total would be $944/3 years.
> 
> DTV is $33/mo for 3 tvs and 5 tuners. Or $396/yr. OR $1188 for 3 years.
> 
> They do run deals where they waive the $15/mo advanced service fee for the 1st year. In that case it would be $216 for the 1st yr. And $396/yr after that. Or $1008 for 3 years. And with DTV you get the privilege of continuing to pay fees in year 4 and beyond.


Your not even close when our take into consideration you can get Sunday Ticket, Cinemax, HBO, etc for free too.

But to compare Apples, I pay $12 a month for 9 tuners on three TV's with nothing upfront for HW.

I will reavaluate after 2 years when my contract is up. I have no need to OWN something that doesn't MAKE me money.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Dan203 said:


> It did not effect the cost of cable boxes to the user, at least not in my area. I'm sure it came into play when it was time for one of their standard price increases, but the actual cost of renting a box did not change. It was just absorbed into the overall service cost. Which is exactly what's happening now with your "free" Genie.
> 
> The main reason the providers are pushing back against a universal standard is not because of cost or technological limitations, it's because they like having you locked into their service by the equipment. They like that moving to another service requires you to get and learn all new equipment because it makes you less likely to jump ship even if the other guy offers you a better deal.


I'm having a hard time keeping up with who says my equipment is not free and who is saying it is...

Are you saying my Genie was "free" or the cost was absorbed into the "service"?

Here's a simple question.... If YOU owned a company, would YOU go out of your way to make things easy for your competition to come in and take money out of your pocket?


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Banker257 said:


> Your not even close when our take into consideration you can get Sunday Ticket, Cinemax, HBO, etc for free too.
> 
> But to compare Apples, I pay $12 a month for 9 tuners on three TV's with nothing upfront for HW.
> 
> I will reavaluate after 2 years when my contract is up. I have no need to OWN something that doesn't MAKE me money.


 I am using figures pulled direct from DTV's website today including the 1st year promotion they are running. Not making them up as I go.

I'm not comparing content pricing as cable also runs 1st year promotional pricing on content. My first year I got cable and internet for $70. My 2nd year I moved down the street and used the wife's name and got the same deal. Plus your HBO is only free for 3 months. And your Sunday Ticket is only free the 1st year. Are we really going to go there with the discussion? I mean I get HBO for $8/mo. You asked about equipment fees.

DTV charges $6 per receiver and then a $15/advanced services fee plus tax if applicable. That's their pricing. Their current promotion will waive the $15/mo adv services fee for the first year.

And what is this 9 tuner stuff? You actually have 3 separate dvrs in your home? Or are some of these extra tuners not actually full fledged tuners.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Banker257 said:


> Here's a simple question.... If YOU owned a company, would YOU go out of your way to make things easy for your competition to come in and take money out of your pocket?


Consider this... if a 3rd party could create a DirecTV receiver, why not permit it?

By your reasoning DirecTV would save money. They'll get the same subscription fee for programming; they'll get the same outlet fee for activating a receiver; the only thing they may not get is a fee for having a particular class of receiver/DVR at that outlet, and they won't get the "opportunity" to have had to pay for that equipment up front to provide to the customer.

Third-party device providers aren't really DirecTV's competition. Dish Network is their competition. Comcast is their competition. Time Warner Cable is their competition.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

trip1eX said:


> I am using figures pulled direct from DTV's website today including the 1st year promotion they are running. Not making them up as I go.
> 
> I'm not comparing content pricing as cable also runs 1st year promotional pricing on content. My first year I got cable and internet for $70. My 2nd year I moved down the street and used the wife's name and got the same deal. Plus your HBO is only free for 3 months. And your Sunday Ticket is only free the 1st year. Are we really going to go there with the discussion? I mean I get HBO for $8/mo. You asked about equipment fees.
> 
> ...


Dont believe everything you read on a website.

First reciever is free, hence the $12 a month I quoted. As far as tuners...

3 Recievers, one with 5 "tuners" 2 with 2 "tuners" each.

That's 9 right?


----------



## MannyE (Dec 7, 2001)

I've got this problem solved. The mergers, monopolies and general BS that's happening with pay TV is disgusting. It's so blatant they don't even bother to hide it anymore. 

I'm cutting the cord/ditching the dish. More of us should do it. Hell all of us should. 

I grew up with the New York Metro area's OTA channels (if memory serves... 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11 and 13) and it was fine. 

I'm in Miami Beach now and I've got even more OTA channels with great quality. So I got the only OTA Roamio (why am I the only one worried about that?) they sell and I'm done.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

dswallow said:


> Consider this... if a 3rd party could create a DirecTV receiver, why not permit it?
> 
> By your reasoning DirecTV would save money. They'll get the same subscription fee for programming; they'll get the same outlet fee for activating a receiver; the only thing they may not get is a fee for having a particular class of receiver/DVR at that outlet, and they won't get the "opportunity" to have had to pay for that equipment up front to provide to the customer.
> 
> Third-party device providers aren't really DirecTV's competition. Dish Network is their competition. Comcast is their competition. Time Warner Cable is their competition.


I couldn't agree more. That's why I don't understand why TiVo seems to be unhappy with their current deal with DirecTV.

As a consumer, If you really HAVE to own your equipment and have a TiVo, there are plenty of options, I don't see the need to involve the government in a private business affair.

Nobody has stepped up yet to answer the simple question.

If you owned a business would you make things easy for your competition to take business away from you?

This is not a "consumer issue" this is a business matter where a private company is having buyers remorse and wants the government to bail them out.

If TiVo really wants to get out of their contract with D* they should take them to court and sue them and spare the 99% of us that are perfectly happy with our free MSO provided equipment the added expense and headache.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Banker257 said:


> Dont believe everything you read on a website.
> 
> First reciever is free, hence the $12 a month I quoted. As far as tuners...
> 
> ...


So you are saying that DTV's website is quoting me a higher price than what it will actually charge me!?!?!!?

Yeah right. 

What I don't believe are your figures. I don't think you know exactly what you're paying and for how long you'll be paying it.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Banker257 said:


> I'm having a hard time keeping up with who says my equipment is not free and who is saying it is...
> 
> Are you saying my Genie was "free" or the cost was absorbed into the "service"?
> 
> Here's a simple question.... If YOU owned a company, would YOU go out of your way to make things easy for your competition to come in and take money out of your pocket?


It was absorbed into the service. Just like the $99 cell phone that goes for $600 retail. The contract, with early termination fee, is proof of that because if you leave they want to get the money for the box.

As for the other part. The difference between normal businesses and cable companies is that cable companies have a functional monopoly. You do not have a choice on which cable company you can use, you're stuck with whatever is offered at your address. DirecTV is a little different because it's not regional like cable, but because it operates in the same industry it should be regulated the same way. The best way to create real competition for cable companies is to make DirecTV, Dish, FIOS, Uverse, and cable all use the same standard. That way those services are truly an alternative to cable from the consumer prospective. Unfair to them? Maybe. But it's the best thing for the consumer and the best way to insure there is real competition.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

trip1eX said:


> So you are saying that DTV's website is quoting me a higher price than what it will actually charge me!?!?!!?
> 
> Yeah right.
> 
> What I don't believe are your figures. I don't think you know exactly what you're paying and for how long you'll be paying it.


I'm not asking you to beleive anything. Call them and ask a CSR what you can get.

Just be sure to come back and let me know what they say.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

dswallow said:


> Keep in mind Comcast has been one of the more strident supporters of TiVo -- one of the few OnDemand providers for the platform, a commitment to work with TiVo on the next-gen built-in security (CableCARD replacement) solution to provide full access, and they were the group originally hoping to deploy TiVo software on existing set-top boxes. TWC customers using TiVo should be so lucky to have their systems taken over by Comcast.


 Oh, yeah? This is the Comcast that was determined that I was stealing by using a TiVo and charged me the same for a cableCARD as for one of their HD STBs?


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Dan203 said:


> It was absorbed into the service. Just like the $99 cell phone that goes for $600 retail. The contract, with early termination fee, is proof of that because if you leave they want to get the money for the box.
> 
> As for the other part. The difference between normal businesses and cable companies is that cable companies have a functional monopoly. You do not have a choice on which cable company you can use, you're stuck with whatever is offered at your address. DirecTV is a little different because it's not regional like cable, but because it operates in the same industry it should be regulated the same way. The best way to create real competition for cable companies is to make DirecTV, Dish, FIOS, Uverse, and cable all use the same standard. That way those services are truly an alternative to cable from the consumer prospective. Unfair to them? Maybe. But it's the best thing for the consumer and the best way to insure there is real competition.


Wouldn't MSO's all using the same "standard" create an even BIGGER monopoly?

Your killing me here, Dan!!


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Banker257 said:


> I'm not asking you to beleive anything. Call them and ask a CSR what you can get.
> 
> Just be sure to come back and let me know what they say.


 $6/mo for each receiver. And $15/mo advanced services fee. SAme thing.

I just don't think you know what you're paying each month nor for how long.

You can put it all to rest by posting your bill. And then posting it again in year 2.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Banker257 said:


> Wouldn't MSO's all using the same "standard" create an even BIGGER monopoly?
> 
> Your killing me here, Dan!!


No. If all MSOs were using the same standard then it would be easy for consumer to choose, and switch between, the various providers. It would also make it easier for more providers to get into the game. IPTV providers, wireless providers, etc... and the consumer could choose one without having to uproot their entire A/V system.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

trip1eX said:


> $6/mo for each receiver. And $15/mo advanced services fee. SAme thing.
> 
> I just don't think you know what you're paying each month nor for how long.
> 
> You can put it all to rest by posting your bill. And then posting it again in year 2.


No, I have no idea what I'm paying, good thing you do! 

Yea, I'll get right on that!


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Dan203 said:


> No. If all MSOs were using the same standard then it would be easy for consumer to choose, and switch between, the various providers. It would also make it easier for more providers to get into the game. IPTV providers, wireless providers, etc... and the consumer could choose one without having to uproot their entire A/V system.


I'm a glass half empty guy. If all the MSO's are equal what's to stop,them from getting together and fix pricing, terms, etc...

Isn't that what everyone is complaining about now?

Bottom line is I like the system the way it is, and 99% of the TV viewing public agrees with me.


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

This is really simple...let's compare the two providers I know best, DirecTV (a subscriber for 13 years until this July) and Verizon (a broadband and phone customer from the beginning and a TV customer since June):

The DirecTV Premiere programming package is $122.99 per month (including the $15 "advanced receiver fee")
The Verizon Ultimate programming package is $89.00 per month

Both packages contain virtually identical channels, delivered at equal quality. The additional charges for DVR rentals work out to be virtually the same (within $10 of each other).

The DirecTV price is $33.99 more than Verizon's. Do you not think that at least SOME of that difference is triggered by the "free" equipment they hand out (both to new customer and as upgrades)?

There is no such thing as "free" equipment. You pay for it one way or another. You can pay your cable/DBS provider monthly, forever, or you can pay TiVo once.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Banker257 said:


> I'm a glass half empty guy. If all the MSO's are equal what's to stop,them from getting together and fix pricing, terms, etc...
> 
> Isn't that what everyone is complaining about now?
> 
> Bottom line is I like the system the way it is, and 99% of the TV viewing public agrees with me.


First off price fixing is illegal. In reality it should reduce prices. Right now very few people switch providers once they're ingrained because they don't want to have to deal with all the equipment changes it would entail. If equipment was interchangeable then competition would matter more.

Think about it this way... would you switch away form DirecTV if it required you to get all new equipment, with a different UI and you'd lose all your DVR recordings? I'm guessing the answer is no, unless they did something to really p*ss you off. But what if your Genie was universal and could simply be transferred over to cable or Dish instead? I'm betting you'd be much more open to it, especially if the price was right.

Just because you and 99% of the viewing public are oblivious to what you're actually paying doesn't mean the system shouldn't change. There was a time when 99% of the public was OK with renting a phone too, but the government stepped in and as a result we got answering machines, cordless phones, and ultimately cell phones. My point is that the government intervening to open up a market to more competition isn't necessarily a bad thing. Competition spurs innovation and lowers prices.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Diana Collins said:


> This is really simple...let's compare the two providers I know best, DirecTV (a subscriber for 13 years until this July) and Verizon (a broadband and phone customer from the beginning and a TV customer since June):
> 
> The DirecTV Premiere programming package is $122.99 per month (including the $15 "advanced receiver fee")
> The Verizon Ultimate programming package is $89.00 per month
> ...


You do know that the $15 "advanced reciever fee" is a thing of the past, right?

My TOTAL Bill last month was $98.85.

That includes: 
Premium Service
HD package
3 Advanced Recievers 
Advanced reciever fee
Whole Home
Sunday Ticket
Cinemax
Protection Plan
Tax


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> I'm a glass half empty guy. If all the MSO's are equal what's to stop,them from getting together and fix pricing, terms, etc...
> 
> Isn't that what everyone is complaining about now?
> 
> Bottom line is I like the system the way it is, and 99% of the TV viewing public agrees with me.


The "system the way it is" is dying. The cost of multichannel service is reaching the breaking point, driving more and more people to "cut the cord." This is driving more and more content to be available over the Internet, driving even more people to cut the cord. Verizon and Dish Network are both preparing IPTV offerings. We are approaching the tipping point where the entire MVPD model will collapse. We are probably about 5 years away from that happening, but a year ago I would have said it was 10 years away. Sooner, rather than later, the only people still using traditional MVPD services will be people that can't get enough bandwidth to use IPTV. DBS has fixed costs...it costs them the same in infrastructure to serve 20 million customers as it does to serve 10. They have used this to their advantage for several years now, becoming more and more profitable as their subscriber base grew. However, once they start shrinking (and they will) the amount of fixed cost each subscriber has to shoulder will increase, or else profitability will decrease. Remember that DBS operated at a loss for over a decade. Which is why Dish wants to get into IPTV. You can say a lot of things about Charlie Ergen, but nobody ever called him dumb.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Dan203 said:


> First off price fixing is illegal. In reality it should reduce prices. Right now very few people switch providers once they're ingrained because they don't want to have to deal with all the equipment changes it would entail. If equipment was interchangeable then competition would matter more.
> 
> Think about it this way... would you switch away form DirecTV if it required you to get all new equipment, with a different UI and you'd lose all your DVR recordings? I'm guessing the answer is no, unless they did something to really p*ss you off. But what if your Genie was universal and could simply be transferred over to cable or Dish instead? I'm betting you'd be much more open to it, especially if the price was right.
> 
> Just because you and 99% of the viewing public are oblivious to what you're actually paying doesn't mean the system shouldn't change. There was a time when 99% of the public was OK with renting a phone too, but the government stepped in and as a result we got answering machines, cordless phones, and ultimately cell phones. My point is that the government intervening to open up a market to more competition isn't necessarily a bad thing. Competition spurs innovation and lowers prices.


On the flip side, what did "deregulation" (competion) do for air travel? Yea sure it's cheaper now, but does anyone really WANT to get on a plane?

Look, I'm not trying to be a ****, I just don't like when our government takes it upon itself to fix something that's not really broke.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Diana Collins said:


> The "system the way it is" is dying. The cost of multichannel service is reaching the breaking point, driving more and more people to "cut the cord." This is driving more and more content to be available over the Internet, driving even more people to cut the cord. Verizon and Dish Network are both preparing IPTV offerings. We are approaching the tipping point where the entire MVPD model will collapse. We are probably about 5 years away from that happening, but a year ago I would have said it was 10 years away. Sooner, rather than later, the only people still using traditional MVPD services will be people that can't get enough bandwidth to use IPTV. DBS has fixed costs...it cost them the same in infrastructure to server 20 million customers as it does to serve 10. They have used this to their advantage for several years now, becoming more and more profitable as their subscriber base grew. However, once they start shrinking (and they will) the amount of fixed cost each subscriber has to shoulder will increase, or else profitability will decrease. Remember that DBS operated at a loss for over a decade. Which is why Dish wants to get into IPTV. You can say a lot of things about Charlie Ergen, but nobody ever called him dumb.


I understand your argument and mostly agree but for the fact that I dont (arguably) pay for my DVR every month, I pay to watch content.

I don't want a private business matter between two companies that both agreed to do business toghether to become MY problem as a consumer.

Take it court guys and leave the government Out of it. They got a lot more important things to worry about.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Banker257 said:


> I just don't like when our government takes it upon itself to fix something that's not really broke.


But it is broken. The cable companies have a functional monopoly over the areas they service. Congress saw this in the 90s and passed a law to open up the settop market to 3rd parties so consumers had at least some choice. DirecTV and Dish, and later Uverse, got special waivers that exempted them from these rules because they were small emerging services with relatively few subscribers. But once AT&T and DirecTV merge it's going to become the 2nd or 3rd largest MSO in the country, which means it's no longer small and no longer deserves to have this waiver.

Just to be clear this is NOT a new regulation, it's the revocation of a special exemption that DirecTV got due to circumstances that no longer apply.

Technologically speaking though they couldn't just be forced to use CableCARDs as they are completely incompatible with DirecTVs system, so they would need to develop a next generation technology that would be independent of each MSOs specific systems. This is where AllVid comes in. It's a spec for a gateway type device that puts all the tuners and conditional access hardware into a box you acquire from the MSO and then that feeds 3rd party devices via a home network using open standards.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

Banker257 said:


> I'm a glass half empty guy. If all the MSO's are equal what's to stop,them from getting together and fix pricing, terms, etc...
> 
> Isn't that what everyone is complaining about now?
> 
> Bottom line is I like the system the way it is, and 99% of the TV viewing public agrees with me.


I really hope you're just trolling and don't really believe all the nonsense like this that you have been spouting. 99% of the TV viewing public does not agree with you. Most people are sick and tired of getting screwed over by their MSOs with high prices and crappy service. Just look at the customer satisfaction surveys and the number of people cutting the cord. Whenever I have to go back down to the local TWC store, there is a line going out the door of people waiting to drop off their crappy TWC equipment, and all they do while standing in line waiting for 2 hours just to return equipment is ***** and complain about Time Warner the whole time.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Banker257 said:


> I couldn't agree more. That's why I don't understand why TiVo seems to be unhappy with their current deal with DirecTV.
> 
> As a consumer, If you really HAVE to own your equipment and have a TiVo, there are plenty of options, I don't see the need to involve the government in a private business affair.
> 
> ...


The reason the government is involved at all is that the airwaves are considered a public resource, for which a private business has mandated responsibilities to provide some level of public benefit, in exchange for the rights to utilize this public resource to provide video services to subscribers. In this case, the mandated requirement is provision of access to these video and other services in a manner that permits third-party hardware to be developed and used via an open standard that would permit interchangeable use of these devices among competing services.

This public benefit has been temporarily waived for satellite providers who have claimed a hardship to meet those requirements. That's finally getting to where everybody considers it laughable to claim it would be a hardship not to comply with rules that have been in effect for over a decade.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

MikeAndrews said:


> Oh, yeah? This is the Comcast that was determined that I was stealing by using a TiVo and charged me the same for a cableCARD as for one of their HD STBs?


You're confusing "Comcast" with "uninformed, confused CSR".


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

Diana Collins said:


> This is really simple...let's compare the two providers I know best, DirecTV (a subscriber for 13 years until this July) and Verizon (a broadband and phone customer from the beginning and a TV customer since June): The DirecTV Premiere programming package is $122.99 per month (including the $15 "advanced receiver fee") The Verizon Ultimate programming package is $89.00 per month Both packages contain virtually identical channels, delivered at equal quality. The additional charges for DVR rentals work out to be virtually the same (within $10 of each other). The DirecTV price is $33.99 more than Verizon's. Do you not think that at least SOME of that difference is triggered by the "free" equipment they hand out (both to new customer and as upgrades)? There is no such thing as "free" equipment. You pay for it one way or another. You can pay your cable/DBS provider monthly, forever, or you can pay TiVo once.


+1
This is exactly what happened to my monthly bill when I went from DirecTV at $120/month with a Genie and 3 Genie minis and plus another $30/month for TWC internet (~$150 total) to TWC for everything using a Roamio and and 3 minis with a comparable cable channel package for a grand total of about $85/month. If you know how to add, that's roughly a $65/month savings which as MANY people said will pay for my TiVo equipment and PLS in a few years, then it's all gravy train baby!


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

HarperVision said:


> +1
> This is exactly what happened to my monthly bill when I went from DirecTV at $120/month with a Genie and 3 Genie minis and plus another $30/month for TWC internet (~$150 total) to TWC for everything using a Roamio and and 3 minis with a comparable cable channel package for a grand total of about $85/month. If you know how to add, that's roughly a $65/month savings which as MANY people said will pay for my TiVo equipment and PLS in a few years, then it's all gravy train baby!


How much does TWC charge you for Sunday Ticket?


----------



## tatergator1 (Mar 27, 2008)

Banker257 said:


> How much does TWC charge you for Sunday Ticket?


Because you got a great deal from DirecTV and NFL Sunday Ticket is "free", right?

From what you've been telling us, you got a very good deal from DirecTV. I get that. It makes sense to you and that's fine. In general, the math of Tivo versus provider equipment favors Tivo after 24-36 months, depending on a users particular situation. Not everyone is comfortable with that break-even horizon and that's fine. If a person tends to be fickle with TV providers, owned equipment is not a good idea. We could go on and on about the +/- of leased versus owned equipment.

IMO, this thread mainly blew up over the "free" concept. You have your point of view and it seems the rest of the forum takes the opposing view. So be it.

Let's move on.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

tatergator1 said:


> Because you got a great deal from DirecTV and NFL Sunday Ticket is "free", right?
> 
> From what you've been telling us, you got a very good deal from DirecTV. I get that. It makes sense to you and that's fine. In general, the math of Tivo versus provider equipment favors Tivo after 24-36 months, depending on a users particular situation. Not everyone is comfortable with that break-even horizon and that's fine. If a person tends to be fickle with TV providers, owned equipment is not a good idea. We could go on and on about the +/- of leased versus owned equipment.
> 
> ...


In all fairness I stated that I didn't want to get into another "free" vs "not free" argument.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

tatergator1 said:


> If a person tends to be fickle with TV providers, owned equipment is not a good idea. We could go on and on about the +/- of leased versus owned equipment.


If there was a really open free market with regard to cable and satellite services and third-party devices, you'd be able to just use most of the equipment you purchased on most any provider. It's quite conceivable that a device supporting both cable and satellite systems could be created for relatively incremental additional costs.

And, of course, there's still the idea that not every choice has to result in the least cost, short term or long term. Some people do prefer different experiences and that value is something many consider worth paying for. Just like people always buying the latest/greatest smartphone or PC... it doesn't mean the more expensive model isn't worthy of the higher price.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> How much does TWC charge you for Sunday Ticket?


Touché, I have an owned H24 receiver left that I activate during football season for NFL ST. It's not free but they give me half price, so I'm happy.


----------



## tatergator1 (Mar 27, 2008)

dswallow said:


> If there was a really open free market with regard to cable and satellite services and third-party devices, you'd be able to just use most of the equipment you purchased on most any provider. It's quite conceivable that a device supporting both cable and satellite systems could be created for relatively incremental additional costs.
> 
> And, of course, there's still the idea that not every choice has to result in the least cost, short term or long term. Some people do prefer different experiences and that value is something many consider worth paying for. Just like people always buying the latest/greatest smartphone or PC... it doesn't mean the more expensive model isn't worthy of the higher price.


All good points. My point was that, in the current market, the functional monopoly of Cable providers and lack of an open satellite standard make equipment portability mostly irrelevant. It is currently better for fickle users to lease provider equipment, unless one really values the Tivo experience. To each, his own.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

(Deleted - duplicate post)


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

My love of TiVo is what keeps me tied to cable. If I could use my Roamio with DirecTV I'd seriously consider switching. So in my case DirecTV is missing out on a customer because of their lack of 3rd party device support.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> You do know that the $15 "advanced reciever fee" is a thing of the past, right?
> ...


Ahhhh...so DirecTV is OK now because they stopped ripping off customers?

Sorta like a mortgage broker who has stopped selling phony paper?

My maid stopped stealing from my wallet so I'll keep her.

All is forgiven?


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Dan203 said:


> My love of TiVo is what keeps me tied to cable. If I could use my Roamio with DirecTV I'd seriously consider switching. So in my case DirecTV is missing out on a customer because of their lack of 3rd party device support.


My love of TiVo got me to switch fom DirecTV. The grass isn't always greener, and all that.

To each his own.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

It's been a while since I looked at DirecTV pricing structures, and I do see they're just as annoying as cable pricing information available to non-subscribers. I presume once one is a subscriber some sort of real price list will come in a bill on some periodic basis, much like the cable price list does.

Anyway, this is what I can glean from the fine print in the new subscriber offers:

First, the fine print:



> *BILL CREDIT/PROGRAMMING OFFER: IF BY THE END OF PROMOTIONAL PRICE PERIOD(S) CUSTOMER DOES NOT CONTACT DIRECTV TO CHANGE SERVICE THEN ALL SERVICES WILL AUTOMATICALLY CONTINUE AT THE THEN-PREVAILING RATES. Three free months of HBO, SHOWTIME and Cinemax with SELECT, ENTERTAINMENT, CHOICE, XTRA and ULTIMATE Packages, a $120 value. LIMIT ONE PROGRAMMING OFFER PER ACCOUNT. Featured package/service names and current prices: SELECT $49.99/mo.; ENTERTAINMENT $57.99/mo.; CHOICE $66.99/mo.; XTRA $73.99/mo.; ULTIMATE $81.99/mo.; PREMIER $129.99/mo.; Advanced Receiver fee $15/mo. In certain markets, a Regional Sports fee of up to $3.63/mo. will be assessed with CHOICE Package or above and MAS ULTRA Package or above. Prices include the following instant bill credits for first 12 months: $30 for SELECT Package; $33 for ENTERTAINMENT Package, $37 for CHOICE Package, $39 for XTRA and $42 for ULTIMATE Package and above. †2014 NFL SUNDAY TICKET OFFER: Package consists of all out-of-market NFL games (based on customer's service address) broadcast on FOX and CBS. Games available via remote viewing based on device location. Local broadcasts are subject to blackout rules. Other conditions apply. 2014 NFL SUNDAY TICKET regular full-season retail price is $239.94. 2014 NFL SUNDAY TICKET MAX regular full-season retail price is $329.94. Customers activating the CHOICE Package or above or the MÁS ULTRA Package or above will be automatically enrolled in the 2014 season of NFL SUNDAY TICKET at no additional cost and will receive a free upgrade to NFL SUNDAY TICKET MAX for the 2014 season. NFL SUNDAY TICKET subscription will automatically continue each season at special renewal rate unless customer calls to cancel prior to start of season. To renew to NFL SUNDAY TICKET MAX, customer must call to upgrade after the 2014 season. Subscription cannot be cancelled (in part or in whole) after the start of the season and subscription fee cannot be refunded. Only one game may be accessed remotely at any given time. Online access is only available on certain operating systems. Computer hardware, software, and Internet connection not included. Mobile access only available on certain devices. Additional data charges may apply. Please check with your service provider. Only available on select gaming consoles. Visit directv.com/NFL for a list of system requirements, compatible mobile devices and authorized gaming consoles. Short Cuts are available from midnight Sunday ET through midnight Wednesday ET. Account must be in "good standing" as determined by DIRECTV in its sole discretion to remain eligible for all offers.
> 
> **24-MONTH AGREEMENT: EARLY CANCELLATION WILL RESULT IN A FEE OF $20/MONTH FOR EACH REMAINING MONTH. Must maintain 24 consecutive months of any DIRECTV base programming package ($29.99/mo. or above) or any qualifying international service bundle. Advanced Receiver fee ($15/mo.) required for all HD DVRs. TiVo service fee ($5/mo.) required for TiVo HD DVR from DIRECTV lease. There is a fee of $6/mo. for each receiver and/or Genie Mini /DIRECTV Ready TV/Device on your account. NON-ACTIVATION CHARGE OF $150 PER RECEIVER MAY APPLY. ALL EQUIPMENT (EXCLUDING GENIEGO DEVICE) IS LEASED AND MUST BE RETURNED TO DIRECTV UPON CANCELLATION, OR UNRETURNED EQUIPMENT FEES APPLY. VISIT directv.com/legal OR CALL 1-800-DIRECTV FOR DETAILS.^GENIE HD DVR UPGRADE OFFER: Includes instant rebates on one Genie HD DVR and up to 3 Genie Minis with activation of the SELECT Package or above; ÓPTIMO MÁS Package or above; or any qualifying international service bundle, which shall include the PREFERRED CHOICE programming package. A $99 fee applies for Wireless Genie Mini (model C41W) upgrade. Whole-Home HD DVR functionality requires a Genie HD DVR connected to one television and a Genie Mini, H25 HD Receiver(s) or a DIRECTV Ready TV/Device in each additional room. Limit of three remote viewings per Genie HD DVR at a time. Visit directv.com/genie for complete details. INSTALLATION: Standard professional installation in up to four rooms only. Custom installation extra.
> 
> ...


24-month agreement, $20/remaining month cancellation fee.
Promotional prices in effect for first 12 months.
Equipment is leased and must be returned or fees apply.
Advanced Receiver fee ($15/mo.) required for all HD DVRs.
TiVo service fee ($5/mo.) required for TiVo HD DVR from DIRECTV lease.
There is a fee of $6/mo. for each receiver and/or Genie Mini /DIRECTV Ready TV/Device on your account.
A $99 fee applies for Wireless Genie Mini (model C41W) upgrade.
Whole-Home HD DVR functionality requires a Genie HD DVR connected to one television and a Genie Mini, H25 HD Receiver(s) or a DIRECTV Ready TV/Device in each additional room.
Limit of three remote viewings per Genie HD DVR at a time.
NFL SUNDAY TICKET subscription will automatically continue each season at special renewal rate unless customer calls to cancel prior to start of season. (obnoxious requirement to call)
Three free months of HBO, SHOWTIME and Cinemax with SELECT, ENTERTAINMENT, CHOICE, XTRA and ULTIMATE Packages, a $120 value.

Current normal package prices:

SELECT $49.99/mo.
ENTERTAINMENT $57.99/mo.
CHOICE $66.99/mo.
XTRA $73.99/mo.
ULTIMATE $81.99/mo.
PREMIER $129.99/mo.
Advanced Receiver fee $15/mo.

Promotional Prices include the following instant bill credits for first 12 months:

$30 for SELECT Package
$33 for ENTERTAINMENT Package
$37 for CHOICE Package
$39 for XTRA
$42 for ULTIMATE Package and above

Every package says "Free Genie HD DVR Upgrade" then in fine print has: "Additional equipment required. Additional & advanced receiver fees apply." I don't quite know how to resolve that with "Free".

So, from DirecTV itself, I see these items related to receiver fees:

$15 "advanced receiver fee" -- if you have any "advanced receivers" you pay this per month.
$6 for each receiver or Genie Mini or DirecTV device on your account.
$99 upfront fee for each Wireless Mini desired, in addition to monthly fee.

And since every package seems to include one HD receiver, presumably that fee is baked into the package price. If there were a way to use a receiver not provided/leased by DirecTV that would be something likely separated out somehow, but as there is no such option, at least for new customer accounts, no reason to separate it since every account obviously needs at least one receiver or isn't particularly useful.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

MikeAndrews said:


> Ahhhh...so DirecTV is OK now because they stopped ripping off customers?
> 
> Sorta like a mortgage broker who has stopped selling phony paper?
> 
> ...


What's your opinion on TiVo dropping the service fees on the Minis?


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

< whole bunch of legalize snipped>

Do you think what you found on a web site is "written in stone" or do you think DirecTV may have a little wiggle room to sweeten the pot if needed?


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Banker257 said:


> < whole bunch of legalize snipped>
> 
> Do you think what you found on a web site is "written in stone" or do you think DirecTV may have a little wiggle room to sweeten the pot if needed?


I don't know why what specials deals any individual may get after some negotiation would affect the discussion of their typical pricing strategy and how availability of third-party devices might offer different features or even a better long-term cost structure.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I don't get why the deal anyone gets for any service has anything to do with this conversation at all.

This post is about TiVo asking the FCC to reconsider the special waiver they granted DirecTV for the integration ban because the circumstances that were used to argue in favor of that waiver no longer apply. The FCC has every right to revoke the waiver if they want. The law passed by congress applied to ALL TV providers, which is why the FCC had to grant a special waiver to DirecTV and Dish in the first place. If the FCC decides to revoke the waiver then DirecTVs only recourse is going to be to try and get the law changed via congress. (good luck with that)


----------



## MannyE (Dec 7, 2001)

Dan203 said:


> I don't get why the deal anyone gets for any service has anything to do with this conversation at all.
> 
> This post is about TiVo asking the FCC to reconsider the special waiver they granted DirecTV for the integration ban because the circumstances that were used to argue in favor of that waiver no longer apply. The FCC has every right to revoke the waiver if they want. The law passed by congress applied to ALL TV providers, which is why the FCC had to grant a special waiver to DirecTV and Dish in the first place. If the FCC decides to revoke the waiver then DirecTVs only recourse is going to be to try and get the law changed via congress. (good luck with that)


I think the reason it's so easy to go off track is because everyone is so sick and tired of the ridiculousness that pay TV has become. This thread is a great example.


----------



## nooneuknow (Feb 5, 2011)

MannyE said:


> I think the reason it's so easy to go off track is because everyone is so sick and tired of the ridiculousness that pay TV has become. This thread is a great example.


I agree. But, without it, I'd miss BBCAHD, and turning my brain into pudding, while watching Doctor Who.

What is insane, is the level of service package it takes for me to get BBCA at all. The "channel paks" required to have it add ~200 channels I'll never watch, or in languages I don't know. If I went with a non-bundle, and only got the paks I needed (still with 90% per pak, channels I don't watch), out of what is in the Premier TV bundle, I'd pay more, for less, due to "discounts" applied to the bundle. Next billing cycle, Cox Premier Internet, plus Premier TV bundle, will likely exceed $200/month with the costs for having three cablecards for base Roamios. I went with base models, so I could lifetime them, and still use them when I can't afford cable anymore.

Every year, they double internet speeds "for free", and are always saying "Only Cox gives you free HD, and nobody else does". Both statements are so false, they should be hauled before Congress. It takes several paid billing items to get HD (if leasing, HD boxes cost more, so does the HD service), and the price of everything goes up every year, a few months after each "free" upgrade, that you can't opt-out of, they claim they are "forced to increase rates due to increased operating costs, taxes, blah, blah, blah...".

They rig it so that if you downgrade anything a tier, the savings is a small fraction, compared to how much you lose by doing so.

But, I have to say, given some of the things I see reported about other companies, I'm glad I'm stuck with Cox, and not a different regional monopoly.

Exterminate!


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

nooneuknow said:


> ...are always saying "Only Cox gives you free HD, and nobody else does"


That's funny. Time Warner Cable sometimes uses the marketing slogan "Time Warner Cable, the home of Free HD".


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

Dan203 said:


> My love of TiVo is what keeps me tied to cable. If I could use my Roamio with DirecTV I'd seriously consider switching. So in my case DirecTV is missing out on a customer because of their lack of 3rd party device support.


Same exact thing here Dan. If they made a DirecTV TiVo Roamio I'd be all over that!

Hey does anyone know if the DirecTV TiVo works with TiVo Desktop, btw?


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> Dont believe everything you read on a website.
> 
> First reciever is free, hence the $12 a month I quoted. As far as tuners...
> 
> ...


No, for NEW subscribers there is no longer a "free first receiver" - you pay $6/month for every box. Subscribers before the change in policy still get a $6/month credit for the first box.



Banker257 said:


> You do know that the $15 "advanced reciever fee" is a thing of the past, right?
> 
> My TOTAL Bill last month was $98.85.
> 
> ...


If it is a thing of the past, why is it on your bill???

Again, for NEW subscribers it is $15, for older subs it is $25 per month.

IOW, new subscribers pay $15 plus $6 for their first receiver, for a total of $21.
Subs from before the change pay $25 and get a credit for their first box, for a total of $25.

If you want to argue fees, you need to understand the fee structure.

As has been pointed out, TiVo is not asking for anything other than a level playing field. The cable/satellite companies provide equipment of varying quality and cost. Some people want the option of using 3rd party equipment, and the regulations already in place require that they be given that option. Satellite and UVerse were given a pass on that rule because they used a technology incompatible with Cablecards and they were still smaller systems, and so a separate "open" security solution (an oxymoron, I know) was not imposed.

Today, the satellite companies are 2 of the largest providers in the market. And now AT&T wants to merge UVerse with one of them. The reasons for their previous exemption from the regulations no longer exist. Therefore, TiVo is asking that, as a condition of the merger, that the exemption be vacated.

That is no more asking for a government created business model than are regulations requiring fire sprinklers in buildings a government created business model for plumbing fixture companies.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

HarperVision said:


> Hey does anyone know if the DirecTV TiVo works with TiVo Desktop, btw?


It does not.

Steve


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Dan203 said:


> I don't get why the deal anyone gets for any service has anything to do with this conversation at all.
> 
> This post is about TiVo asking the FCC to reconsider the special waiver they granted DirecTV for the integration ban because the circumstances that were used to argue in favor of that waiver no longer apply. The FCC has every right to revoke the waiver if they want. The law passed by congress applied to ALL TV providers, which is why the FCC had to grant a special waiver to DirecTV and Dish in the first place. If the FCC decides to revoke the waiver then DirecTVs only recourse is going to be to try and get the law changed via congress. (good luck with that)


well some said DTV and their low cost (lack of cost) of equipment (which also then meandered into talk about pricing of content) is good for consumers and Tivo can go suck an egg if they want access to DTV customers. I think that's how it got started.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

HarperVision said:


> Hey does anyone know if the DirecTV TiVo works with TiVo Desktop, btw?


It does, but only the music and photos, not video.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

trip1eX said:


> well some said DTV and their low cost (lack of cost) of equipment (which also then meandered into talk about pricing of content) is good for consumers and Tivo can go suck an egg if they want access to DTV customers. I think that's how it got started.


Yup, what he said.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

If it is a thing of the past, why is it on your bill???

It's on the bill as a credit. -$15


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Banker257 said:


> If it is a thing of the past, why is it on your bill???
> 
> It's on the bill as a credit. -$15


Fits in with the promotion they are giving out right now. $15/mo waived for the 1st year.

Report back in year 2.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> If it is a thing of the past, why is it on your bill???
> 
> It's on the bill as a credit. -$15


You must have gotten DirecTV before 2/9/2012. In reality, the Advanced Receiver Fee is a thing of the present, not the past.

https://support.directv.com/app/ans...vice-if-i-already-have-whole-home-dvr-service,


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

ncted said:


> You must have gotten DirecTV before 2/9/2012. In reality, the Advanced Receiver Fee is a thing of the present, not the past.
> 
> https://support.directv.com/app/ans...vice-if-i-already-have-whole-home-dvr-service,


That's entirely possible. Don't know what others are paying, just know they can be negotiated with.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> That's entirely possible. Don't know what others are paying, just know they can be negotiated with.


I know my parents, who got D* in July are paying it. The worse part is, to avoid paying $25 instead of $15, they have to renew their contract when it expires.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

I would like Tivo to get access to the combined as ATT/DTV solution as ATT is planning to put Gigabit into Cupertino and it would provide an interesting competitor to Comcast.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

HarperVision said:


> Hey does anyone know if the DirecTV TiVo works with TiVo Desktop, btw?





stevel said:


> It does not. Steve





wmcbrine said:


> It does, but only the music and photos, not video.


Thanks for the answers. So what about KMTTG and PyTiVo to push and pull recordings from it over to a roamio on the same network?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

It does not support video transfers of any kind. It also uses the old UI, similar to the S3 units, does not have access to 3rd party apps and does not support any of the mobile app features. It's basically outdated and functionally crippled even compared to a Premiere, even though it came out after the Premiere. And the reason why is because DirecTV is a closed system and this is all they allowed TiVo to do.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

Ok that makes sense. Thanks Dan!


----------



## MannyE (Dec 7, 2001)

I have the directv TiVo and I think the best way to describe it is " hamstrung" it feels like a beta from 2003. 


Sent from my galafreyan transdimensional communicator 100 years from now.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Banker257 said:


> If you owned a business would you make things easy for your competition to take business away from you?


Would you hold your customers hostage? Apparently, you would.

Why not let them have choices? Why not let them use the best DVR out there?


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> My love of TiVo is what keeps me tied to cable. If I could use my Roamio with DirecTV I'd seriously consider switching. So in my case DirecTV is missing out on a customer because of their lack of 3rd party device support.


I agree with this statement. The fact that you can't use an advanced Tivo and the fact that they tried to screw me when I left them in 2006 are keeping me from going back. The tried to say I had a new commitment for used/owned equipment that I had changed out on my account.

So, I would likely go with an Tivo Roamio on AT&T Uverse, if they ever allowed such a device.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> No. If all MSOs were using the same standard then it would be easy for consumer to choose, and switch between, the various providers. It would also make it easier for more providers to get into the game. IPTV providers, wireless providers, etc... and the consumer could choose one without having to uproot their entire A/V system.


Amen, this is the real reason why FCC should have never given them the waivers. They have been hiding behind this waiver for years now.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Overall, I'd staunchly against the D*/AT&T merger, due to reduction of competition, but I have mixed feelings about Comcast/TWC.

Comcast is clearly a better cable company. They aren't hostile towards TiVo and TiVo users like TWC is, and they don't use the SDV kludge. However, I see a few points about the merger.

1. Comcast already has problems homogenizing their systems. Some are rebuilt, some aren't. What are they going to do with TWC systems? Are they going to come in, nuke SDV, fix the copy flag problem, and step back on internet speeds to homogenize? Or are they going to roll out H.264 to keep the ~200 HD's and 300mbps internet without needing SDV? Are they going to rebuild all non-860 plants to be able to support all this?
2. NBCU. Getting rid of it should be a condition of the merger. Comcast is too cozy with content providers, and making them that much bigger is a terrible idea.
3. Their size and monopoly power on the internet side is a little scary. While they have competition on the video side in all of CONUS, they are a monopoly or effectively monopoly provider over a large part of their footprint.



tarheelblue32 said:


> My Roamio Plus works just fine on TWC, SDV and all.


Comcast is a FAR better provider for TiVo. We don't yet know how they will integrate the systems, but Comcast is actively supporting TiVos, while TWC is actively hostile towards TiVo, and has done everything that they legally can to break as much of TiVo as they can.



Banker257 said:


> Why do they feel the world owes them a business model?


No. Not a business model. But equal access.



tatergator1 said:


> All good points. My point was that, in the current market, the functional monopoly of Cable providers and lack of an open satellite standard make equipment portability mostly irrelevant. It is currently better for fickle users to lease provider equipment, unless one really values the Tivo experience. To each, his own.


It depends on the market. Most places in the US only have one QAM provider. I have two, that both suck. Some areas around Boston and NYC have 3 good QAM providers.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

Bigg said:


> Comcast is clearly a better cable company. They aren't hostile towards TiVo and TiVo users like TWC is, and they don't use the SDV kludge. However, I see a few points about the merger.


Certainly TWC's misuse of CCI flags certainly proves your point, but that doesn't really affect me since I don't transfer recordings or do any OOH streaming. And I don't deny that SDV certainly has its potential drawbacks, but I haven't had any problems with it working correctly since the last tuning adapter firmware update earlier this year.

It would be good if TWC would change their tune and be more TiVo friendly like Comcast, but a merger is NOT required for them to do that. They can (and should) do that all on their own. A Comcast/TWC merger might make things better for TiVo users, but it would be bad for consumers in general, so I am still very much against it. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

tarheelblue32 said:


> A Comcast/TWC merger might make things better for TiVo users, but it would be bad for consumers in general, so I am still very much against it.


Can you enumerate why it would be bad, identifying opinions vs. measurable facts?


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

dswallow said:


> Can you enumerate why it would be bad, identifying opinions vs. measurable facts?


You make a good point, I am largely speculating that it would be bad, since it is impossible for anyone to truly know the future. However, it just seems to me that allowing the 2 largest cable providers in a quasi-monopolistic business, (that also happen to be 2 of the worst companies in the country for customer satisfaction) to merge is just asking for trouble in the long run.


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

DirecTV generally ranks #1 or #2 in customer satisfaction surveys amount cable and satellite providers. Of course, that's a pretty low bar.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Yeah I think the monopoly as an internet provider is a bigger concern. Easier for them to push around those who want to distribute content via internet. Saying no to them means saying no to another 20+ million customers than before.

And then Comcast's ownership of major content producers. They can screw with the terms they give to satellite providers more easily because now they own another 20+ million customers that compete with satellite. 


As a video service provider they at least have satellite competition.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

tarheelblue32 said:


> Certainly TWC's misuse of CCI flags certainly proves your point, but that doesn't really affect me since I don't transfer recordings or do any OOH streaming. And I don't deny that SDV certainly has its potential drawbacks, but I haven't had any problems with it working correctly since the last tuning adapter firmware update earlier this year.


The copy flags are simply pure evil on TWC's part to screw up TiVos and MCE machines. And they still cripple part of what you paid for, even if you don't regularly use those features. SDV is another point of failure, and, at least for now, it's a kludgy workaround to cover up bad network management, like having analogs wasting bandwidth, although it may become inevitable in the future if 100% digital, H.264 (for HD) 860mhz systems start to run out of bandwidth if/when DOCSIS 3.1 and UHDTV both start putting strains on the available bandwidth.



> It would be good if TWC would change their tune and be more TiVo friendly like Comcast, but a merger is NOT required for them to do that. They can (and should) do that all on their own. A Comcast/TWC merger might make things better for TiVo users, but it would be bad for consumers in general, so I am still very much against it. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."


It depends on what Comcast does. If they kill off the CCI (easy, it's just a setting that TWC is using to screw TiVo users) and SDV (harder, since it would mean a clean-up of TWC's HD lineup, elimination of analog, etc) on TWC systems, it would be a vast improvement for consumer equipment choice, since MCE and TiVo systems would both work way better. Plus, TWC customers who don't use TiVo or MCE would have access to X1, which supposedly it the next best thing to an actual TiVo.



trip1eX said:


> Yeah I think the monopoly as an internet provider is a bigger concern. Easier for them to push around those who want to distribute content via internet. Saying no to them means saying no to another 20+ million customers than before.


Yeah, it's a far bigger concern. Even if a particular house or apartment can't "see" the satellites, Comcast/TWC has video competition from both DISH and DirecTV in the entirety of the CONUS. Even here (NYC and Hartford-New Haven), where DISH doesn't want to compete (due to lack of sports channels), even they have a small market share to compete with incumbents.

And you look at markets with DSL, and those customers can't stream video anyways for the most part because there's not enough bandwidth. So it's a hugely captive audience in most areas.



> And then Comcast's ownership of major content producers. They can screw with the terms they give to satellite providers more easily because now they own another 20+ million customers that compete with satellite.


I'm more concerned that they are already handing over deals that are too favorable to the content providers since they own NBCU. Without NBCU, maybe they could finally beat these content providers into submission with take-it-or-leave-it deals to bring the programming costs down.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

magnus said:


> Would you hold your customers hostage? Apparently, you would.
> 
> Why not let them have choices? Why not let them use the best DVR out there?


Yep. Don' cha think that if a company _doesn't_ make customers lock in, it's a sign that they think the product is competitive?

Who knew that hoodlum's protection rackets and owned turf were acting in the customer's best interest?


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

The FCC should require the cable company to sell or rent a Tivo with the cable card installed an paired, so the customer can have the same installation experience as the cable company's DVR provides.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Just the fact that DirecTV goes out alot when there is very dense cloud coverage is reason enough for me never to go back to them. At work it is a constant pain with people complaining every time the signal goes out. It happened again today. And this is with the dish having the highest signal strengths possible with the five satellite locations. 

Whether it's for a few seconds or a few minutes, I would think it would be too much of a PAITA. WHen I had DirecTV between 2001 and 2007, it was a different dish and only three satellite locations. SO while still a pain, the signal didn't go out anywhere near as often as it does now. We have several buildings at work where many of the DirecTV channels will go down during the same conditions.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

aaronwt said:


> Just the fact that DirecTV goes out alot when there is very dense cloud coverage is reason enough for me never to go back to them. At work it is a constant pain with people complaining every time the signal goes out. It happened again today. And this is with the dish having the highest signal strengths possible with the five satellite locations.
> 
> Whether it's for a few seconds or a few minutes, I would think it would be too much of a PAITA. WHen I had DirecTV between 2001 and 2007, it was a different dish and only three satellite locations. SO while still a pain, the signal didn't go out anywhere near as often as it does now. We have several buildings at work where many of the DirecTV channels will go down during the same conditions.


I had more outages with TiVo and FIOS in 6 months than I've had in 12 years of DirecTV.

Must be lucky.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

aaronwt said:


> Just the fact that DirecTV goes out alot when there is very dense cloud coverage is reason enough for me never to go back to them. At work it is a constant pain with people complaining every time the signal goes out. It happened again today. And this is with the dish having the highest signal strengths possible with the five satellite locations.
> 
> Whether it's for a few seconds or a few minutes, I would think it would be too much of a PAITA. WHen I had DirecTV between 2001 and 2007, it was a different dish and only three satellite locations. SO while still a pain, the signal didn't go out anywhere near as often as it does now. We have several buildings at work where many of the DirecTV channels will go down during the same conditions.


DirecTV got worse when they went to a 5 satellite setup and a couple of the ones they were using were originally intended for satellite radio, using the Ka band. Dish uses the Ku band exclusively, and I find it resists rain fade better. In fact we had a huge storm tonight, and didn't lose signal at all on Dish. Of course, there are other downsides with Dish.


----------



## MannyE (Dec 7, 2001)

Banker257 said:


> I had more outages with TiVo and FIOS in 6 months than I've had in 12 years of DirecTV.
> 
> Must be lucky.


Been with Directv for more than 12 years. I have had very few outages. But they do exist. I live in Miami Beach and I've never experienced the cloud cover issues. It has to be storming very hard for the signal to go out. I have both the older small dish feeding two GXCEBOT DirecTivo units and one of the large HD dishes feeding a new TiVo unit. Maybe it's the flatness of the landscape in Florida? I don't know.

Moot point anyway as I will soon be cutting the cord. I can no longer justify the cost of pay TV.

Sent from my galafreyan transdimensional communicator 100 years from now.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

MannyE said:


> Been with Directv for more than 12 years. I have had very few outages. But they do exist. I live in Miami Beach and I've never experienced the cloud cover issues. It has to be storming very hard for the signal to go out. I have both the older small dish feeding two GXCEBOT DirecTivo units and one of the large HD dishes feeding a new TiVo unit. Maybe it's the flatness of the landscape in Florida? I don't know.
> 
> Moot point anyway as I will soon be cutting the cord. I can no longer justify the cost of pay TV.
> 
> Sent from my galafreyan transdimensional communicator 100 years from now.


Cloud cover is a non issue for me as well. A storm is a whole other story. Honestly, if it's storming bad enough for me to lose service, I shut it down anyway. I don't feel like taking a chance on replacing thousands of dollars of equipment to watch a TV show.

But if I did, isn't that why we have DVR's? I can watch something recorded if I was that bored.


----------



## Grakthis (Oct 4, 2006)

I've been in plenty of satellite houses where a hard rain, with no lightning, took out their TV service or produced enough pixilation to make it unwatchable. Also, snow. "Watch your DVR" is a pretty piss poor response to a service outage.

In the midwest, this time of year, virtually every sundown comes with a hard rain. We're on like day 6.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

Banker257 said:


> Cloud cover is a non issue for me as well. A storm is a whole other story. Honestly, if it's storming bad enough for me to lose service, I shut it down anyway. I don't feel like taking a chance on replacing thousands of dollars of equipment to watch a TV show.


For whatever reason, I've actually had more issues with weather-related outages over the years with cable than with satellite. Oddly, it only seems to affect TV and not Internet. I have lived in 4 very different locations in my region in the past 15 years, and in all of them TWC has had a tendency to go out during a storm fairly regularly.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

ncted said:


> For whatever reason, I've actually had more issues with weather-related outages over the years with cable than with satellite. Oddly, it only seems to affect TV and not Internet. I have lived in 4 very different locations in my region in the past 15 years, and in all of them TWC has had a tendency to go out during a storm fairly regularly.


I had no luck with FIOS. It was horrible. Would go out if someone spit on my sidewalk.


----------



## Banker257 (Aug 4, 2014)

Grakthis said:


> I've been in plenty of satellite houses where a hard rain, with no lightning, took out their TV service or produced enough pixilation to make it unwatchable. Also, snow. "Watch your DVR" is a pretty piss poor response to a service outage.


Ok, read a book.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Banker257 said:


> Ok, read a book.


Don't Just Watch TV. Read a Book.

The new DTV slogan.


----------



## kokishin (Sep 9, 2014)

Banker257 said:


> I had no luck with FIOS. It was horrible. Would go out if someone spit on my sidewalk.


Neighbor issues?


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

Banker257 said:


> I had no luck with FIOS. It was horrible. Would go out if someone spit on my sidewalk.


There was something wrong with your FiOS installation.

We had DirecTV for 13 years and experienced an outage whenever a thunderstorm approached from the southwest (as most do in this part of the country). We would lose signal about 20 minutes before it started to rain (CONUS HD first, then spotbeamed HD, then SD) and get it back 5 minutes or so after it started raining (it isn't rain on the dish, it is how many water droplets are in the air between your dish and the satellite). We even lost signal twice due to severe snow storms. Outages were rare, but usually around a half hour long and often came during primetime (messing up scheduled recordings).

We have had FiOS internet and phone for about 7 years (and TV for 4 months) and have never had a weather related outage of any kind. In fact, during hurricane Sandy, everything went out, including power, but FiOS stayed up (we had a generator). We even had a tree fall on the FiOS cable on our street (the cable was holding the tree up) and we still didn't lose service.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Yes. FiOS outages are extremely rare for me too. Mine used to have a 99.999% uptime until I had a botched upgrade to the 150Mb/s tier. Which had my services down for several days. Which took my uptime down to something like 99.98% at the five year mark.. Although after the last couple of years uptime is at something like 99.99% over the last 7+ years.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

FYI Banker257 has been banned and will not be returning. Someone brought it to our attention that he was just the new handle of a previously banned user. We don't allow previously banned users to return under new names.


----------



## tatergator1 (Mar 27, 2008)

Dan203 said:


> FYI Banker257 has been banned and will not be returning. Someone brought it to our attention that he was just the new handle of a previously banned user. We don't allow previously banned users to return under new names.


Interestingly, he became much more civil after sbiller called him out. Good riddance.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

DirecTV should not have outages if properly installed. Outages mean the dish isn't properly aimed. Cable just depends on the local system, FIOS is rock solid, as a passive fiber system, and a relatively new system at that.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

I don't think my Fios has gone completely* out even once in... nine years? Wow, has it been that long?

* I've lost Internet briefly, but the TV side stayed on.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

aaronwt said:


> Just the fact that DirecTV goes out alot when there is very dense cloud coverage is reason enough for me never to go back to them. At work it is a constant pain with people complaining every time the signal goes out. It happened again today. And this is with the dish having the highest signal strengths possible with the five satellite locations.
> ...


Yeahbut, good and evil Rob Lowe say that DirecTV has _95%_ reliability!

(That would be an outage of 1.2 Hours A DAY!)


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

MikeAndrews said:


> Yeahbut, good and evil Rob Lowe say that DirecTV has 95% reliability!
> 
> (That would be an outage of 1.2 Hours A DAY!)


Really?!? They actual say 95% reliability? That is crap. I wouldn't want to subscribe to any system with such low reliability. It should at least be 99%. I used to be 99.999% on FiOS at one time. Now it's around 99.99%. Something like that. And when I had Comcast the reliability was similar to my FiOS reliability. 95% is terrible.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

tatergator1 said:


> Interestingly, he became much more civil after sbiller called him out. Good riddance.


I have a feeling he'll be back again under another nick for more Tivo hating.


----------



## moedaman (Aug 21, 2012)

tatergator1 said:


> Interestingly, he became much more civil after sbiller called him out. Good riddance.


That's because he knew that people were on to him and he probably decided to cool down to get off their radar for a while.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

MikeAndrews said:


> Yeahbut, good and evil Rob Lowe say that DirecTV has _95%_ reliability!
> 
> (That would be an outage of 1.2 Hours A DAY!)


DIRECTV delivers 99% worry-free signal reliability, based on a nationwide study of representative cities.

I expect Dish is the same.

edit: forgot the URL

https://support.directv.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1653/~/does-the-signal-go-out-in-bad-weather?


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

My own experience is that DirecTV is more reliable than cable (though I have not had cable in over 10 years). I very rarely have any kind of outage, even in heavy storms. The biggest problem I have had is ice buildup on the LNB and that is rare. When it does go out, the problem usually resolves itself quickly (unlike cable.)


----------



## MannyE (Dec 7, 2001)

trip1eX said:


> Don't Just Watch TV. Read a Book.
> 
> The new DTV slogan.


Ha ha. That made me laugh out loud. Glad I wasn't drinking or it would have gone up my nose!! 

Sent from my galafreyan transdimensional communicator 100 years from now.


----------



## MannyE (Dec 7, 2001)

moedaman said:


> That's because he knew that people were on to him and he probably decided to cool down to get off their radar for a while.


What was it that Shatner told the Trekkies? "Get a life?" Jeez.

You know what has 100% reliability? OT Fing A baby. Hurricane ripped my roof antenna off? No problem! Let's get the rabbit ears!

Ha. I'm like a Luddite. OTA and a pots line. I even have a dial phone in my office and an Underwood for typing LETTERS. lol.









Sent from my galafreyan transdimensional communicator 100 years from now.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

No OTA for me. Can get maybe one station.


----------



## christheman (Feb 21, 2013)

stevel said:


> My own experience is that DirecTV is more reliable than cable (though I have not had cable in over 10 years). I very rarely have any kind of outage, even in heavy storms. The biggest problem I have had is ice buildup on the LNB and that is rare. When it does go out, the problem usually resolves itself quickly (unlike cable.)


You get a lot of snow in the Winters where you live? I get "lake effect" snow from the Great Lakes. So this, my first Winter using DirecTV, will be interesting. If it gets out of hand, I have been informed that a swift whack of a broom to the back of the dish should solve matters. I am 3-4 months into my contract and have only noticed it lose signal twice, and only for a few minutes each time, which is a huge improvement over TWC.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

They do have dish heaters to prevent buildup of snow. Not sure how they work but I've read about them in the past.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

A good tip is to also spray some Pam on the dish occasionally to prevent any snow buildup.


----------



## MannyE (Dec 7, 2001)

HBO GO is a go! 


Sent from my galafreyan transdimensional communicator 100 years from now.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

MikeAndrews said:


> Yeahbut, good and evil Rob Lowe say that DirecTV has _95%_ reliability!
> 
> (That would be an outage of 1.2 Hours A DAY!)





aaronwt said:


> Really?!? They actual say 95% reliability? That is crap. I wouldn't want to subscribe to any system with such low reliability. It should at least be 99%. I used to be 99.999% on FiOS at one time. Now it's around 99.99%. Something like that. And when I had Comcast the reliability was similar to my FiOS reliability. 95% is terrible.


Sorry. He says 99.9% reliability. That still means an outage of 43 minutes a month.






BUT still implies that that's better than cable. It's only better than COMCAST cable.


----------



## bradleys (Oct 31, 2007)

nomo123 said:


> Interestingly Sam Biller was completely wrong in his allegations and violating the TOS. Turns out that long timers and people with the "right" arguments get different rules around here.
> 
> Just saying for the record.


A troll: A person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4]

Healthy debate is never discouraged on a message board, but trolls can destroy a community and drive away members. That is a bad thing for the members and it is a bad thing for the people who own and profit from the board.


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

My OT quote on the investor board was a reference to the movie Taladega Nights and wasn't intended to be an endorsement or attack on any specific religion. Geesh... FWIW, Nomo is Tim TiVo's sidekick on Investor Village where the board is focused on attacking me and the other moderator of Investor Discussion Boards (IDB). Nomo and Tim TiVo (aka Banker257) have been banned from IDB for repeated violations of expected etiquette on message boards.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

christheman said:


> You get a lot of snow in the Winters where you live?


Yes, we get a lot of snow. Snow doesn't tend to be a problem as much as ice can be. My dish is mounted within broom's reach of a window so I can deal with that if necessary, but I can go 3-4 years without a problem.

There are indeed dish heaters, but I don't use one. There are sprays that help with reducing snow/ice buildup.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Guys, if you hate somebody so much, just use the "ignore" function and be done with it. If you're concerned about a user, PM the folks in charge of the forum. Don't get into arguments with other users about it in unrelated threads. It won't help; you won't convince each other either way; and in the end the only thing that matters is what the people in charge of this forum want to do about it. So take it to them. Please.

If you want to argue about it publicly, do it in a thread in Happy Hour or, likely more appropriately, in the TC Club forum, since I think even such a discussion is likely against the forum rules itself, but could probably survive some reasonable conversation someplace, until you move to name calling or threats, at least.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

nomo123 said:


> Bradleys, not sure what your purpose is.
> 
> I think critical and minority opinions should be encouraged. And if trolling by your definition is "starting arguments or upsetting people" then that is a lot more posts than just Banker257.
> 
> ...


No one cares. Banker257 spouted off 80% nonsense in the month he was here. He said alot of stupid nonsensical crap and cared not to discuss it but only to repeat it. Or so it seemed to me.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

nomo123 said:


> Interestingly Sam Biller was completely wrong in his allegations and in doing so he was violating the TOS. Turns out that long timers and people with the "right" arguments get different rules around here. Not too different from the rest of the world!
> 
> Just saying for the record.


Hi Banker! I mean, enormastitz. You do know that we can see that you just joined, right?

Reported.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Gone


----------



## christheman (Feb 21, 2013)

stevel said:


> Yes, we get a lot of snow. Snow doesn't tend to be a problem as much as ice can be. My dish is mounted within broom's reach of a window so I can deal with that if necessary, but I can go 3-4 years without a problem.
> 
> There are indeed dish heaters, but I don't use one. There are sprays that help with reducing snow/ice buildup.


Thanks Steve (and everyone else), I think I'll just "chill out" and see how things go this Winter before I make any changes or additions.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

HarperVision said:


> A good tip is to also spray some Pam on the dish occasionally to prevent any snow buildup.


Seconded.


----------



## davidjplatt (Aug 27, 2003)

Look, I was with DirecTV for 16 years and was happy with the DVR situation with my first TiVo purchase of a Sony SAT-T60 when it only had one tuner available. Then I got a Philips DSR-6000 TiVo and was equally happy with that system. Then I got an HD TiVo (HR10-250). I got a second HR10-250 when DirecTV promised me that I could get my locals in HD in the DC area in MPEG2. Then they changed courses and put my locals on MP4. So they basically screwed me out of $1500. They even had the "promise of MPEG2 locals" noted on my account so they actually gave me two HD-DVRs with no upfront lease buydown and ended up giving me two more with no upfront lease buydown when they completed eliminated MPEG2 HD programming.

I had multiple problems with the DVRs from DirecTV (compared to no issues with any of the TiVo's) until they sort of stabilized the software about three years after I got the DVRs. Of course the fact that there were only two tuners per DVR was an issue since the "free" DVRs were costing me $6 per month. I had so many issues with signal quality and rain fade (after two replacement dishes because the tech couldn't figure out "why the signal is compromised") and constant price increases that I ended up switching to FiOS for TV and phone (I already had internet through FiOS). I got a multiroom DVR and STB for "free" for 18 months and got two Ceton quad tuner boxes and two cable cards. I had problems with the Cisco DVR but never had problems with the two PCs running Media Center under Windows 7. 

As soon as the 18 months was up and Verizon wanted to start charging me $33 a month for my "free DVR and STB". They were coming out with their Quantum TV and it would have run me $32 a month for the new DVR with 6 tuners instead of two. But since the software was basically the same as the Cisco box I decided the TiVo Roamio might be a better solutions.

It has been. My TiVo Roamio Pro and two Minis have been fantastic. I got them six months ago and now I remember why TiVo has also become a verb - "I TiVo'd it last night". It is simply the best DVR out there.

My belief is that DirecTV and AT&T Uverse should be forced to allow third party boxes to be used. I would not go back to DirecTV because I can't use a TiVo on their system.

AT & T and DirecTV are just plain greedy.


----------



## MannyE (Dec 7, 2001)

And the TiVo directv does use is so strangled by restrictions it feels like my Phillips box from 1999. I beta tested it, the longest beta I have ever been a part of. At one point almost a year went by with no activity, a testament to the lack of enthusiasm on DirecTV's part and frustration on Tivo's part. They were forced to shoehorn the TiVo into the directv box. I can't even imagine how frustrating it must have been for TiVo to work with Dtv. It ended up feeling like a GXCEBOT with HD. 


Sent from my galafreyan transdimensional communicator 100 years from now.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

MannyE said:


> And the TiVo directv does use is so strangled by restrictions it feels like my Phillips box from 1999. I beta tested it, the longest beta I have ever been a part of. At one point almost a year went by with no activity, a testament to the lack of enthusiasm on DirecTV's part and frustration on Tivo's part. They were forced to shoehorn the TiVo into the directv box. I can't even imagine how frustrating it must have been for TiVo to work with Dtv. It ended up feeling like a GXCEBOT with HD.
> 
> Sent from my galafreyan transdimensional communicator 100 years from now.


Shouldn't you be watching Dr Who rather than posting?


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

tarheelblue32 said:


> Shouldn't you be watching Dr Who rather than posting?


He Tivo'ed it.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

davidjplatt said:


> My belief is that DirecTV and AT&T Uverse should be forced to allow third party boxes to be used. I would not go back to DirecTV because I can't use a TiVo on their system.
> 
> AT & T and DirecTV are just plain greedy.


They should realize that their own greed has backfired. I would be a DirecTV customer now if they supported a TiVo equivalent to the TiVo Premiere/Mini setup.



MannyE said:


> And the TiVo directv does use is so strangled by restrictions it feels like my Phillips box from 1999. I beta tested it, the longest beta I have ever been a part of. At one point almost a year went by with no activity, a testament to the lack of enthusiasm on DirecTV's part and frustration on Tivo's part. They were forced to shoehorn the TiVo into the directv box. I can't even imagine how frustrating it must have been for TiVo to work with Dtv. It ended up feeling like a GXCEBOT with HD.


They could have made a good DirecTiVo on their hardware, but they chose to cripple it as much as possible, since they really, really didn't want it, and they wanted Genie instead.


----------



## dochawk (Aug 1, 2002)

Bigg said:


> They should realize that their own greed has backfired. I would be a DirecTV customer now if they supported a TiVo equivalent to the TiVo Premiere/Mini setup.


I changed this week, and will be putting up with cable over TiVo.

On one of my regular tech support calls over their dvrs, they asked why I planned to leavee:

"Because your DVRs suck."


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

My Dad just switched back to cable from his DTV experiment. I think he even paid to end his contract early. Comcast helped by offering deals he couldn't refuse. I think he had some problems during bad weather. It didn't help the dish had to be on the roof which wasn't great for him during winter in MN. I told him about the Pam trick when he first got it, but not sure he did it.

Brother has DTV and has had it for years. He loves it. Probably why my Dad decided to try it. Brother didn't like cable when he tried it a few years ago. I think, for him, it was mostly about Sunday Ticket and then being used to the DTV interface etc.

Other brother is a "cord cutter." Or cord never. His family has no tv. They watch on laptops. Kids too. He watches Premiere League on the laptop. Amazon on Demand through account sharing with parents. I think for his family it's about the cost. And lifestyle of being more active. Ironically he grew up with cable more than any of us siblings. HE's 8 years younger than me. And I didn't have cable through high school or very late in high school. I always went to friend's house to watch MTV etc.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

dochawk said:


> I changed this week, and will be putting up with cable over TiVo.
> 
> On one of my regular tech support calls over their dvrs, they asked why I planned to leavee:
> 
> "Because your DVRs suck."


Yeah. Unfortunately people like you leaving probably isn't enough of a signal to them to get them to support TiVo. I bet current TiVo Premiere 4 and Roamios could support D* through a SWiM 5 or SWiM8 USB adapter with some software work on the TiVos... It wouldn't be the cheapest way to do it, but if they didn't screw up the copy flag, I'd get DirecTV.


----------



## MannyE (Dec 7, 2001)

That's the bottom line right there. Us here on this board posting and arguing amongst ourselves represent a tiny niche. The equivalent of audiophiles lamenting that Pioneer is leaving the home audio business. The companies could care less what we screech about. 


Sent from my galafreyan transdimensional communicator 100 years from now.


----------

