# TW passes TiVo in Subs



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

In their earnings release today, Time Warner reported 1.5 million DVR subs. It is unlikely that TiVo will report that many SA subs when numbers come out for its 1/31 ending quarter. TW Subs rose 219,000 in the quarter, far higher than TiVo's will.

This puts TW by itself ahead of TiVo and pulling away.



TWX Press Release said:


> Digital Video Recorder subscribers rose 219,000 during
> the quarter (the largest quarterly increase ever) and 621,000 for the
> full year to 1.5 million subscribers, serving 27% of digital video
> customers


.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

HDTiVo said:


> TW Subs rose 219,000 in the quarter, far higher than TiVo's will.


How do you presume to know how many subs TiVo sold when they haven't even released the numbers yet?  I know you've never been a staunch TiVo supporter, but I've never seen you post such blaten FUD before. (then again maybe I just missed it)

Dan


----------



## interactiveTV (Jul 2, 2000)

Dan203 said:


> How do you presume to know how many subs TiVo sold when they haven't even released the numbers yet?  I know you've never been a staunch TiVo supporter, but I've never seen you post such blaten FUD before. (then again maybe I just missed it)
> 
> Dan


Dan,

Tivo does give guidance. It's not as if Tivo is suddenly going to announce 500K SA subs.

I'm expecting north of 270K though but that would put Tivo and TW neck in neck though because Tivo counts about 90K lifetime subs over the 4 year mark (who don't pay any revenue).

The greater point is valid, that TW and other MSOs have the capacity and marketing to drive installed bases at a faster rate than Tivo. That, of course, should hopefully benefit Tivo whenever the Comcast trials get started.

_ITV


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> How do you presume to know how many subs TiVo sold when they haven't even released the numbers yet?  I know you've never been a staunch TiVo supporter, but I've never seen you post such blaten FUD before. (then again maybe I just missed it)
> 
> Dan


Dan:

While TiVo isn't giving guidance on Sub adds, they are still giving guidance on revenues and expressing a sense of subscription trends in their statements; that information is consistent with sub add behavior over the last two quarters. Both ways of looking at it point to close to 100,000, half what would be needed to equal TW. Remeber also the TW number is 12/31 and TiVo's will be 1/31.

Maybe if TiVo launches a new marketing model - which they have said for some time they will do - sub adds will accelerate. They claim their tests have shown that will be the result.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

interactiveTV said:


> I'm expecting north of 270K
> 
> _ITV


What leads you to think that? As stated above I have a very different view.


----------



## HogarthNH (Dec 28, 2001)

HDTiVo said:


> Maybe if TiVo launches a new marketing model - which they have said for some time they will do - sub adds will accelerate. They claim their tests have shown that will be the result.


... Maybe if TiVo had a HD solution on the market already.

... but then TiVo stopped being remarkable some time ago.
http://www.fastcompany.com/online/67/purplecow.html


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

TW Press Release said:


> Digital video subscribers grew 199,000 in the quarter (the
> largest fourth-quarter increase since 2002) and 595,000 in the full
> year for a total of 5.4 million, representing 49% of basic video cable
> subscribers. Digital Video Recorder subscribers rose 219,000 during
> ...


TW is the only cable company I see breaking out the DVR number from the Digital sub(or HD sub) numbers.

Looking at this again, I see a very interesting fact: DVR subs increased more than total Digital subs for the year and QTR. That's a very good sign for the DVR business; so many existing Digital customers are upgrading to DVR that DVR subs are outpacing new Digital subs, (ie. marginal penetration of DVR in Digital cable is over 100%!)



Comcast PR said:


> During the year, Comcast Cable deployed 1.5 million advanced set-top boxes with DVR and/or HDTV programming capability. At December 31, 2005, 25.2% of digital customers have one or more advanced set-top boxes compared to 13.1% at the end of 2004.
> ...
> In addition, Comcast had more than 2.7 million advanced set-top boxes with DVR and/or HDTV programming capability in digital customers' homes, driving growth in video revenue per subscriber.
> ...
> ... 1.1 million or 13.1% increase in the number of digital customers, the highest rate of digital subscriber additions in 3 years. Comcast Cable ended the year with 9.8 million digital cable subscribers and digital cable penetration reached 45.6% of basic subscribers.


Comcast reported 1.5M new HD boxes for the year (incl. DVRs). (I assume an "advanced" STB is an HD box DVR or not). It appears that advanced STBs are far outpacing new Digital subs, meaning lots of people are upgrading.

TW seems a little ahead in digital penetration vs. Comcast, but if Comcast is close to TW's success, it could have 2M DVRs out there, having added about 1M in the year.

The DVR business is doing very well, people are showing strong willingness to both adopt and upgrade to it. By the end of this year, when TiVo has its Comcast box available, there might be well over 3M potential upgrades from DVR - plus millions more Digital and analog subs who could upgrade directly to Comcast/TiVo.


----------



## samo (Oct 7, 1999)

HDTiVo said:


> What leads you to think that? As stated above I have a very different view.


ITVs estimate is much closer than yours. 4th quarter has been traditionally strongest for TiVo. Last year they had 251K net additions, so with prices this year being close to nothing I would expect this number to be higher. But as ITV mentioned it makes no difference - TiVo can not be expected to compete with cable or satellite companies on number of subs. For years TiVo has been behind Dish, DirecTV and Comcast. Combo units will always attract more people than SA boxes. And as market share of combo boxes increases, SA boxes market share will continue to go down. As far as Comcast deal, I have a mixed opinion. On one hand it is a good deal for TiVo (assuming that Comcast will do aggressive marketing), on other hand knowing how cheap people are in general - I wouldn't hold my breath that people will be willing to pay extra fees for a TiVo software on their boxes. And it certainly going to hurt SA series 3 sales. It may even drive down Series 2 subs as TiVo present customers will be switching to Comcast boxes to get dual tuners and HD.


----------



## Spiff (Mar 1, 2004)

I'm a TW customer who will be returning his Explorer 8300HD as soon as TiVo releases their HD DVR. Can't stand the crap.


----------



## TivoNM (Oct 19, 2005)

one thing that needs to be kept in mind...the cable co's are giving dvrs to thier subscribers when they upgrade to digital cable in a large number of cases. So why is it now do think the numbers are SOOOO high.
Just my look into things


----------



## Arcady (Oct 14, 2004)

Most people use Windows. That doesn't mean it is the best, or that people are aware that they are using the worst POS available. As long as TiVo can stay in business, who cares about market share?


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

> As long as TiVo can stay in business, who cares about market share?


Sums it up for me too.


----------



## TiVoMonkey (Jan 12, 2002)

That sounds like the same way that people treat Nintendo.

They say Nintendo is in 3rd place and losing the "Console War."

Yet they have decent market share, and make a profit.

I wish I could lose that kind of "war."

I see it not so different for TiVo. The big companies will make their huge gains, obviously, they are quite big, and have the marketing cash to stay that way.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

TiVo's market share and/or profitability matters for several reasons.


Updating equipment and/or software costs money 
In order for subscription costs to be reasonable you need more subs 

I generally believe competition is good for the consumer, but TiVo needs to make money through an increased subscriber base or it can not develop and deliver the products and services we want for a reasonable cost.

Thanks,

atmuscarella


----------



## Crrink (Sep 3, 2002)

Arcady said:


> Most people use Windows. That doesn't mean it is the best, or that people are aware that they are using the worst POS available. As long as TiVo can stay in business, who cares about market share?


Oh yes, we all know Mac's are so super cool and pretty, and virus resistant.
And if a Mac fits into your life, that's great. Problem is that 97% of PC owners disagree with you. I suppose it's possible that they're all wrong, but it's highly, highly unlikely.

The best solution for me is the OS that can run the programs I need and like to use, and that isn't OS/X.

OS/X isn't "better" than Windows any more than Beta was better than VHS. You and the Beta guys just value different things than most people. That doesn't make most people wrong, it just makes them different...and it sure as heck doesn't make you "right." You're "different" too 

Anyway, to get back on topic, I hope to pick up a S3 as soon as they're available, but that will all depend on the cost, features, and interoperability with my S2's. Might turn out that the Moxi I rent from the cable company is a "better" dvr for me...but I sure hope not, because I like the TiVo interface.


----------



## mrmike (May 2, 2001)

Crrink said:


> OS/X isn't "better" than Windows any more than Beta was better than VHS. You and the Beta guys just value different things than most people.


Actually, Beta did have measurable technical superiority to VHS. So unless "accurate video reproduction" isn't one of your CTQ's, we pretty much lost out on that one.


----------



## Crrink (Sep 3, 2002)

mrmike said:


> Actually, Beta did have measurable technical superiority to VHS. So unless "accurate video reproduction" isn't one of your CTQ's, we pretty much lost out on that one.


Yes, but if "accurate video reproduction" was the only thing that mattered neither Beta nor VHS would have won out, and whatever medium did win out, nobody would buy those cruddy consumer level machines - we'd all have the crazy expensive ones the TV stations use!

We wouldn't use a lousy, cheap-o TiVo to do our MPEG-2 encoding, we'd use the big, bad stuff the cable and satellite companies use. That stuff blows TiVo out of the water on video quality!!

VHS was better because it made it to market faster and cheaper. That's why it won. And it deserved the victory.

Like it or not "better" encompasses a lot more than technical specifications, and even when the technical specifications are what you're looking for, you are nearly always limited by budget long before you're limited by technology.

And yes, I took the argument to ridiculous ends to make a point, but the point is still completely valid. Besides, it's really no more ridiculous than arguing that 97% of computer users choose the wrong OS, and we hear that one quite often.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=3749788&&#post3749788



thechiz said:


> I also watched the game via my Adelphia HD DVR.
> Look at the last few posts in this thread.... see a pattern here ?
> 
> By the time TiVo comes out with the series 3 most of the
> ...


There certainly will be some premium for a TiVo over a generic DVR. No question $1,000 will move very few units. There is a good chance the box can sell for much less and still be profitable.

Will the SA Series 3 be TiVo's main product or TiVo software upgrades to Cable boxes?


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Rogers expresses his view on the DVR race with free cable boxes...

http://today.reuters.com/news/artic...11Z_01_N02540955_RTRUKOC_0_US-SUMMIT-TIVO.xml



Reuters said:


> Rogers told the Reuters Global Technology, Media and Telecoms Summit in New York this week that he hopes cable operators will be "hugely successful" in distributing generic digital video recorders, or DVRs.
> 
> In many cases, these cable DVRs -- able to pause live TV and skip commercials -- are distributed free, replacing TiVo DVRs that typically cost at least $200 in households.
> 
> ...


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

HDTiVo said:


> Rogers expresses his view on the DVR race with free cable boxes...
> 
> http://today.reuters.com/news/artic...11Z_01_N02540955_RTRUKOC_0_US-SUMMIT-TIVO.xml


the TiVo guy on my 240 stand alone box just shed a tear


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Weird, mine just jumped with joy at the thought of having more friends.


----------



## TydalForce (Feb 9, 2006)

Crrink said:


> Yes, but if "accurate video reproduction" was the only thing that mattered neither Beta nor VHS would have won out, and whatever medium did win out, nobody would buy those cruddy consumer level machines - we'd all have the crazy expensive ones the TV stations use!
> 
> We wouldn't use a lousy, cheap-o TiVo to do our MPEG-2 encoding, we'd use the big, bad stuff the cable and satellite companies use. That stuff blows TiVo out of the water on video quality!!
> 
> ...


I think, in this discussion, the more importat point is this:

Apple has about 5-10% of the installed user base of personal computers. That's hardly the majority. But, Apple is a very successful and very profitable company with a loyal following.

Marketshare does not equal success. Marketshare does not equal profitability. Apple is proof that you don't need to be huge to be successful.

In contrast, look at Commodore Business Machines. They had the most popular personal computer in the 1980's - the Commodore 64. Here's a company with probably the most successful personal computer model *ever*. And where are they today?

(I'm not picking on Commodore - I still have some C= equipment laying around - they had some killer products in their day!)

In summary, Time Warner and Comcast and DirectTV and the rest of the world can all come out with their own DVRs. And that's great. As long as TiVo can keep their loyal followers and keep creating innovative ways to watch television and remain profitable, they don't have to be the biggest.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

But Apple has low market share and (often) profitability. TiVo has low share and substantial losses. Apple was often unprofitable before the high market share iPod/iTunes came along.

Why pick Commodore? A low market share firm (TiVo) with a great idea is more likely to go out of business than a high market share (Commodore) firm. TiVo has an even greater burden to avoid going the way Commodore went.

The opinion that TiVo will be just fine with low market share will be acceptable when TiVo manages to show profits.


----------



## TydalForce (Feb 9, 2006)

i was trying to make the point that marketshare does not equal success

maybe I didn't do it as well as I could have lol

I picked Commodore because I'm pretty familiar with their story, and they're another computer company like Apple so its easier to make the comparison.

Yes, TiVo has to do some work to create and maintain reasonable profit - and in part, that's where us loyal TiVo'ers come in (spread the word!) but they don't have to be the biggest to do it.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

TydalForce said:


> i was trying to make the point that marketshare does not equal success
> 
> Yes, TiVo has to do some work to create and maintain reasonable profit - and in part, that's where us loyal TiVo'ers come in (spread the word!) but they don't have to be the biggest to do it.


 :up:


----------



## TiVoStephen (Jun 27, 2000)

HDTiVo said:


> In their earnings release today, Time Warner reported 1.5 million DVR subs. It is unlikely that TiVo will report that many SA subs when numbers come out for its 1/31 ending quarter. TW Subs rose 219,000 in the quarter, far higher than TiVo's will.
> 
> This puts TW by itself ahead of TiVo and pulling away.


Huh? From our quarter ending October 31, 2005, we had well over 4 million subscribers.

(Page 7 of http://a423.g.akamai.net/7/423/1788/91b3f0c8dc0d5e/www.tivo.com/cms_files/pdfs/press/_69.pdf )

I guess you're talking only about standalone subscribers. But that's hardly the same thing as them "passing us in subs" as your headline reads.


----------



## samo (Oct 7, 1999)

TiVoOpsMgr said:


> Huh? From our quarter ending October 31, 2005, we had well over 4 million subscribers.
> 
> (Page 7 of http://a423.g.akamai.net/7/423/1788/91b3f0c8dc0d5e/www.tivo.com/cms_files/pdfs/press/_69.pdf )
> 
> I guess you're talking only about standalone subscribers. But that's hardly the same thing as them "passing us in subs" as your headline reads.


Out of curiosity, I know that TiVo will not get paid for DTV subs after Feb, 2007, but will TiVo continue to count DTV subs in their totals and will TiVo continue to upload TiVo yellow star ads on DTV units? Not that it makes that much difference to me, but it would be nice if yellow star disappeared from the menu.


----------



## TiVoStephen (Jun 27, 2000)

Samo, I think the answer to that might well be material, so (since we're only a couple of days from our conference call) I will decline to answer at present time.  I wouldn't be surprised if that issue is addressed specifically during the call.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

TiVoOpsMgr said:


> I guess you're talking only about standalone subscribers. But that's hardly the same thing as them "passing us in subs" as your headline reads.


Totally right. The headline doesn't always tell the whole story.  
Big Surprise!

I started the thread when I was stuned by the realization that a cable company had already come so far, in that its measure of subs vs TiVo's long term future measure of subs had been surpassed. I still had a TiVo is #1 mindset, which in one way of looking at it was becoming untrue. Also, I realized TW is just one cable company while TiVo is sold throughout the US.

The thread has evolved for my purposes into thinking about how robust the DVR market is, and further into those implications for TiVo with its cable software strategy. You may have noted when I broke down the Comcast numbers some time ago that I remarked how much opportunity there could be (3M units) just with Comcast by year end. I also mentioned direct upgrades to TiVo (SAs) which was a nod toward the S3 primarily.

I too want to ask you about how you, or TiVo, think I ought to weigh/value the remaining DirectTV units in light of the end of that revenue stream being in sight - at least as per the last public info on the subject. I am sure you will not be able to answer until the Earnings Release on the 8th, but maybe after?

Thanks.


----------



## interactiveTV (Jul 2, 2000)

HDTiVo said:


> I too want to ask you about how you, or TiVo, think I ought to weigh/value the remaining DirectTV units in light of the end of that revenue stream being in sight - at least as per the last public info on the subject. I am sure you will not be able to answer until the Earnings Release on the 8th, but maybe after?


 I think we should leave those kinds of questions to investor relations. They can be very helpful and it's just a quick phone call.

Pony isn't an officer of Tivo nor, as I understand it, does he have clearance from compliance to answer those types of things and I don't think it's fair to grill him on that type of discussion. While you probably won't be able to ask a question on the Q conference call, you can call investor relations and ask anything you like.

Even clarifying already public info can be a troublesome place for him. With Reg FD, if he inadvertendly releases something or gives a hint that is misinterpreted, it could have serious implications.

_ITV


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

interactiveTV said:


> I think we should leave those kinds of questions to investor relations. They can be very helpful and it's just a quick phone call.
> 
> Pony isn't an officer of Tivo nor, as I understand it, does he have clearance from compliance to answer those types of things and I don't think it's fair to grill him on that type of discussion. While you probably won't be able to ask a question on the Q conference call, you can call investor relations and ask anything you like.
> 
> ...


So happens, Pony is not in this thread. TiVoOpsMgr came in today for some reason and brought up the subject himself, one month after the statements were made, and right before the earnings release. Is it too much to ask him to contribute more at a time when he might be free to do so?


----------



## interactiveTV (Jul 2, 2000)

HDTiVo said:


> So happens, Pony is not in this thread. TiVoOpsMgr came in today for some reason and brought up the subject himself, one month after the statements were made, and right before the earnings release. Is it too much to ask him to contribute more at a time when he might be free to do so?


You're right, TiVoOps, not Pony. Sometimes I find it funny how may coffee addiction has a direct result on my brain function.

His comment was pretty generic about the 4 million sub mark. Yes, it opens the box about whether they count them since there are no revenues, etc.

Is it too much to ask him to contribute more? Nope.  Ask away.

I think when we get too detailed in terms of revenue recognition or sub recognition it should get directed at IR.

Pony and I actually had a heated thing about this once awhile ago (whether these guys should be making those kinds of statements).

Or, to put it another way, if you ask and they actually do answer, I wouldn't put much stock in the answer. They are NOT authorized to give out that kind of information or to discuss it. I've had plenty of conversations -- most unhappy -- with EVP and SVP level employees who stepped over the line in discussing issues relating to filings.

Tivo will, in my speculation, be changing the definition of a subscriber or creating a two-tiered system. I don't think they suddenly want to be reporting a substantially lower number. It might actually, depending on how they define it, allow them to add back some lifetimes. It's an interesting question but not one of paramount importance except if you're in a PR numbers race. If Tivo had 50K subscribers but was wildly profitable, that would be fine. 

My personal feeling is none of the sub numbers are worth a damn anymore. SA2 is a dead unit -- end of lifed. DirecTV is gone. S3 isn't out yet and neither is the cable platform. Tivo makes it on S3 and cable or not, regardless of the number of S2 units sold last quarter or this year. The unit numbers now are just a function of cash burn. My $0.01 (I'm worth less without coffee)

_ITV


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

TiVo clearly breaks out their Direct and SA subs, and has for a long time.

I agree with what ITV said above, except that I still think the current SA2 base is still comparable to cable DVR subscribers. I wouldn't want to start a thread titled 'TW has 1.5M more subs than TiVo!!!!'


----------



## TiVoPony (May 12, 2002)

interactiveTV said:


> I think we should leave those kinds of questions to investor relations. They can be very helpful and it's just a quick phone call.
> 
> Pony isn't an officer of Tivo nor, as I understand it, does he have clearance from compliance to answer those types of things and I don't think it's fair to grill him on that type of discussion. While you probably won't be able to ask a question on the Q conference call, you can call investor relations and ask anything you like.
> 
> ...


In this case, interactiveTV is correct. It's neither my place nor Stephen's to speak to TiVo's finances. That's why we have quarterly earnings calls.

It's fine for us to make mention of disclosed information (such as the 4M subscriber number Stephen noted above). But please don't expect either one of us to provide color commentary or speculation on TiVo's finances or our quarterly calls.

Pony


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

With TiVo's earnings release coming up later today, this CNNMoney.com article  is a pretty comprehensive piece on the TiVo landscape.

More important than actual subscriber numbers will be any comments about strategy, and other announcements for the future.



> TiVo does have one such partnership with Comcast, the nation's largest cable firm, set to begin later this year. Harding said that more licensing deals would be beneficial to TiVo because it would mean lower marketing costs.
> 
> But there are questions about how much revenue the Comcast deal and other potential arrangements with cable outfits will actually generate for TiVo. Analysts say that the cable companies probably will negotiate for a significant percentage of the monthly subscriber fees that the TiVo services generate, meaning that these deals might not be very profitable for TiVo.
> 
> "TiVo is willing to license to all comers for what I suspect is not a lot of money," said Steven Frankel, an analyst with Cannacord Adams.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

samo said:


> ITVs estimate is much closer than yours. 4th quarter has been traditionally strongest for TiVo. Last year they had 251K net additions, so with prices this year being close to nothing I would expect this number to be higher.


Well, it looks like I eeeekkkkkeeedddd out a tiny victory, being off by 83K vs off by upwards of 88K.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

HDTiVo said:


> Maybe if TiVo launches a new marketing model - which they have said for some time they will do - sub adds will accelerate. They claim their tests have shown that will be the result.


Well, TiVo did launch the marketing model, and it was nothing like I expected.

The result, the likes of TW added 212K DVRs in Q1; TW and Comcast showed no "seasonality" and only growth in DVRs; meanwhile TiVo showed seasonality and continued lower YOY growth, adding only 51K SA units.

Moreover, while the TiVo Q1 included some time with the new marketing model, nothing was said to indicate it is having a positive effect on sales. Indeed the tone was abysmal regarding results and post quarter activity. TiVo could not even say they'd match last year's Q2 net ads of 40K.

Remember Q206? That was when TiVo decided 'not to even try to sell units' and 'turn a profit.' New marketing plan & new DTs in 2Q07 and TiVo can't even match a quarter when they 'purposely didn't sell units?'

It seems the DVR market is on fire everywhere except at TiVo.

The DT will do very little to boost sales. While TiVo priced it correctly relative to the ST ($30 premium) it still is vastly overpriced and hurt by the misguided marketing plan. Furthermore, the DT lacks features sufficient to excite new buyers or a replacement cycle such as MPEG4 playback, Component (480i +) and/or HDMI (upscale) output, digital audio in/out, etc.

Maybe when there are some analog cable co. distributions there will be a significant number of SA units added - but they will be no more sufficient to pull TiVo out of the financial muck than millions of DTiVo units have.

In the meantime, TiVo's weak subscriber growth threaten its two promising business lines - advertising and DOD. Advertisers are in an experimental phase, looking for ways to get at a changing viewer style, but they won't stick around with TiVo for long with so few viewers to reach. The same small numbers means TiVo lacks clout in DOD; TiVo will not be considered a worthwhile platform to purpose content to by a significant enough content creator base.

If TiVo were ramping subs with a proper marketing plan, advertisers and DOD would back TiVo longer and that in turn would drive sub growth further - particularly through availability of desireable DOD content.

TiVo has a financial presentation on 6/13; that should be plenty of time to come up with some definitive statements about recent marketing results - including the effect on sales of the DT.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

I think the DT units are primarily going to existing Tivo owners at this point. I doubt there were thousands of people out there without a Tivo thinking, "I don't want a single tuner Tivo. I'll wait for the DT and then buy my first DVR." 

On the other hand I can picture thousands of current SA owners frustrated at not being able to record two things at once standing in line to buy a DT.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

HDTiVo said:


> It seems the DVR market is on fire everywhere except at TiVo.


Don't tell that to Charter customers. In most areas they are no longer able to get a Moxi DVR box. Some have been told they will not be doing any installations of them for the rest of the year. The main reason being it takes almost 8 years to recoup their money on each box.


----------



## interactiveTV (Jul 2, 2000)

rainwater said:


> Don't tell that to Charter customers. In most areas they are no longer able to get a Moxi DVR box. Some have been told they will not be doing any installations of them for the rest of the year. The main reason being it takes almost 8 years to recoup their money on each box.


 I don't know much about Moxi/Charter but I would highly doubt that 8 year number as it would have to be a pure hardware/service fee ROI which would exclude important things like customer retention (churn reduction) and the SAC.

On a pure cost of hardware plus service cost over monthly fee, 8 years could be correct, but ignoring customer retention is not a good idea.

_ITV


----------



## MurrayJimW (Apr 21, 2004)

In addition to 3 s2s lifetimed I have a TW DVR. It does HD and 2 tuners but it sucks!!! It'll be gone as soon as Tivo gets thier s3 out and I am sure I am not alone.....


----------



## JasonRossSmith (Jul 21, 2005)

Arcady said:



> Most people use Windows. That doesn't mean it is the best, or that people are aware that they are using the worst POS available. As long as TiVo can stay in business, who cares about market share?


Well I would agree with that to a point. However, I want a company who's product I believe in, and who's stock I bought to do more than just stay in business.

I know right now is a precarious time for Tivo, but with all the recent stuff, they've added (yes I know some don't really care about stuff like Yahoo traffic, including me...) the fact that many companies are even taking the time to negotiate out deals with them is a good sign. However to really capture market share, and grow they need to get into the business of selling their Operating System to the cable co's to run on whatever hardware. Sony tried to control Beta and killed it even though it was superior to VHS. JVC said "who the heck cares if you conform to our standards on VHS, if you build a crappy VHS vcr, consumers will just buy ours instead."

Tivo should do the same thing. Sell the OS, the interface, service, etc. and let the cable co's slap it on any old box.

That is where the money is at for them if they can work the deals.


----------



## JasonRossSmith (Jul 21, 2005)

HiDefGator said:


> I think the DT units are primarily going to existing Tivo owners at this point. I doubt there were thousands of people out there without a Tivo thinking, "I don't want a single tuner Tivo. I'll wait for the DT and then buy my first DVR."
> 
> On the other hand I can picture thousands of current SA owners frustrated at not being able to record two things at once standing in line to buy a DT.


That would be me! Ok who wants to buy an S2 single tuner?.....


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

TiVo's Fate: What's in the Cards?


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

HDTiVo said:


> TiVo has a financial presentation on 6/13; that should be plenty of time to come up with some definitive statements about recent marketing results - including the effect on sales of the DT.


Not one word. Not even a Q from the audience.


----------



## skanter (May 28, 2003)

Spiff said:


> I'm a TW customer who will be returning his Explorer 8300HD as soon as TiVo releases their HD DVR. Can't stand the crap.


I have to get that TW box soon when I get a HD plasma. Why is it so bad?


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

skanter said:


> I have to get that TW box soon when I get a HD plasma. Why is it so bad?


The software is terrible. And the hardware has had issues with overheating and failure. It is a crap box - still better than the older 8000. If you're very lucky your box will have Pioneer's Passport and not SA's SARA software, it isn't as bad.

Google around and you'll see a lot of complaints about the SA DVRs.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

Crrink said:


> VHS was better because it made it to market faster and cheaper. That's why it won. And it deserved the victory.


I guess you didn't buy a Sony Betamax in mid-1975, in a small town with a population of less than ten thousand on the Oregon coast like I did. VHS was not even announced by JVC until September 1976.

Why VHS won the consumer video equipment marketplace was not based upon an early entry, but the later availability, starting about 1980, of prerecorded content, extended recording time, availability of different brands, and a somewhat lower price, but not by a wide margin.

If it was based completely on technical merits and early entry into the marketplace, then the Sony Betamax should have won hands down and it did win in the broadcaster marketplace for decades after the last consumer Betamax was sold. The Betamax was without a doubt a technically superior small format video recording system and used a superior tape transport system, that VHS has never matched, but then who cares today?

The difference in the cost of the equipment in 1980 was still a minor issue in comparison to the total cost, but the availability of prerecorded content is what made the difference and is the major reason why I bought a VHS recorder in 1980, but I still used the Sony Betamax to record broadcast content.

Having lived and being aware during that time period helps resolve these misconceptions.

If you don't believe me, Google the information.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Sony wouldn't widely license Betamax to other manufacturers, and they controlled content too. VHS was licensed to basically anyone who wanted it, and any content was OK - which meant the adult video industry was all over it. (VHS completely revolutionized the adult content industry.) Wide licensing meant more competition and rapidly dropping prices, which meant more adoption, cycle. Beta was technically superior, but Sony's tight control over the format strangled it.

They've learned their lesson with Blu-ray, and built a wide coalition of support.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

*HDTiVo Blog* 
7/21/2006

The last couple of days I've been thinking its time to start talking about 2Q07 results. I guess it took hold because last night I dreamed of reading an annoucement that they did something like 347,000 net ads roughly 50-50 between DTV and SA. The dream ended with me shouting 'Wow! Nice job and way to go TiVo.'

Now those are Q4 kinds of numbers from a somewhat bygone era. Chances are TiVo will lose DTV subs and they've guided to below last year's SA net ads (ie. <40,000); remember that 2Q06 was when TiVo _tried _ to sell less boxes and turn a profit.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=3680499&&#post3680499



ChuckyBox said:


> I think the TiVo HD box for the next couple of years will be the Series 3. The next iteration of the Series 2 is much more likely to be a dual-tuner version of the current box (probably with a faster processor and a bit more memory, and maybe with built-in ethernet). Such a box would fit in much better with TiVo's focus on the analog cable market than the box you describe, and would be very versatile.


TiVo ultimately came out with a box like this and not the sort envisioned in that thread. They also implemented a (disappointing) new marketing plan; launched KidZone, Product Watch and TiVoCast; and won a big patent judgement. I won't bother readers now with a review of my comments regarding marketing and KidZone, etal.

The DT and KidZone, at least, were suggested to lead to analog cable deployment deals. IP strength was expected by many to enhance those negotiations. But there are no deployments in sight. Management's last comments (1Q07 Conf. Call) were as weak as you can get on the impact IP is having on the negotiations, and didn't provide any confidence that they were getting anywhere in general.

With a recent sale on 3yr contracts ($100 off) and no further comments, frankly there is no information lately to encourage optimism about SA ads.

So I continue sitting here in a funk over the prospects for TiVo even with all the new initiatives, and maybe tomorrow night I'll dream about an announcement of the next CEO.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

Time Warner's DVR related cable sub numbers for Q2:



> Basic video cable subscribers increased 18,000 during the quarter
> - the fourth straight quarter of growth and the largest second-quarter
> gain since 2002. Digital video subscribers rose 171,000 over the
> previous quarter for a total of 5.8 million, also marking the largest
> ...


----------



## skanter (May 28, 2003)

megazone said:


> The software is terrible. And the hardware has had issues with overheating and failure. It is a crap box - still better than the older 8000. If you're very lucky your box will have Pioneer's Passport and not SA's SARA software, it isn't as bad.
> 
> Google around and you'll see a lot of complaints about the SA DVRs.


I got the SA8300HD box last week -- and I'm pleasantly surprised! It's got the Passport software.

The software is quite good -- I would say about 90% of Tivo's functionality. Some features are better, it has two tuners, and it responds a lot faster than Tivo. This box has 90 hours of SD storage (only one quality which looks better than Tivo's Best). The HD looks terrific. I've only had it for five days, but few reliability problems at this point except one reboot.

I must say I'm impressed at what you get for $8.95/mo and a free box. If they implement the SATA port for external storage -- it has only 20 hrs. HD -- and if reliability is good, I'll have to reconsider buying an S3.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

My brother still hasn't gotten his SA8300 to work and he's currently on box #3.


----------



## skanter (May 28, 2003)

JYoung said:


> My brother still hasn't gotten his SA8300 to work and he's currently on box #3.


Two boxes didn't work at all?


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

skanter said:


> Two boxes didn't work at all?


Yep and Box #3 ain't looking too good right now.


----------



## skanter (May 28, 2003)

JYoung said:


> Yep and Box #3 ain't looking too good right now.


Could be a problem with the signal, or his lousy cable company is recycling defective boxes.

How about calling the cable guy?


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

Some of the more recent posts on this thread are perfect examples of why a prospective user really should try something out for him/herself rather than taking someone else's word for it, at least with regard to subjective evaluations.


----------



## rorion (Jul 26, 2006)

HDTiVo said:


> Digital penetration of basic video
> cable subscribers reached nearly 53% at the end of the quarter.


It looks like the argument that the cable DVR costs more because you need digital cable is getting pretty weak. 53% have it so far, and it's growing at a much faster rate than analog. And a substantial portion of those who stick to analog basic cable are probably doing so largely for cost reasons so many of them are probably not in the market for a subscription-based DVR of any kind.


----------



## DTSDude (May 24, 2006)

Further proof that the masses will learn to like something as long as they don't know there's a better product on the market. *shakes head


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

skanter said:


> Could be a problem with the signal, or his lousy cable company is recycling defective boxes.
> 
> How about calling the cable guy?


His lousy cable company is the same as yours, Time-Warner.
And he's already had two truck rolls on this. They just keep giving him bad boxes.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

rorion said:


> It looks like the argument that the cable DVR costs more because you need digital cable is getting pretty weak. 53% have it so far, and it's growing at a much faster rate than analog. And a substantial portion of those who stick to analog basic cable are probably doing so largely for cost reasons so many of them are probably not in the market for a subscription-based DVR of any kind.


Do they even tell people about the analog packages anymore?

I've been poking around the TWC site trying to get some pricing and they only seem to talk about Digital cable.
A search for Analog cable or analog gets me an error message. 

This doesn't exactly strike as pushing cable cards either.

http://www.timewarnercable.com/socal/products/cablecard.html?Zip=undefined


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

JYoung said:


> Do they even tell people about the analog packages anymore?


At least Comcast shows the price for "Basic Cable" (AKA: Expanded Basic) Service. But just try to find information about Limited Basic (AKA: Lifeline Service) without specifically asking!


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

rorion said:


> It looks like the argument that the cable DVR costs more because you need digital cable is getting pretty weak. 53% have it so far, and it's growing at a much faster rate than analog. And a substantial portion of those who stick to analog basic cable are probably doing so largely for cost reasons so many of them are probably not in the market for a subscription-based DVR of any kind.


Yes, when I did a comparison about six months ago, TWC was in the lead on Digital Cable penetration, but Comcast was right up there. Another striking thing about Cable DVR is the enormous (marginal) penetration of DVR per Digital Sub; at one point for TWC it was over 100% (!), and even this QTR it was over 90%.

And, yes, the analog cable market is not going to be a big one for DVR - especially TiVoes at the prices today. But that's just an obvious statement of reality. The analog market initiative is no brighter than any other TiVo has undertaken. However, in terms of TiVo's very small size, a properly structured marketing initiative might have yielded results significant to TiVo.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

I know stock talk isn't allowed so I wont get into the stock specifics but after reading this thread i need to ask:

HDTivo- Do you short sell Tivo stock?

Just curious...


----------



## rorion (Jul 26, 2006)

Wow. It took until the third page to get an implication of being a stock manipulator. The guard dogs here are getting slow. Maybe they're not as well fed as they used to be.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

rorion said:


> Wow. It took until the third page to get an implication of being a stock manipulator. The guard dogs here are getting slow. Maybe they're not as well fed as they used to be.


LOL

I'm usually not into that at all.

Myself I think Tivo has made some serious mistakes and goofy choices and dont mind pointing them out.

But I find it funny that the OP has had very little positive to say about tivo in this thread for over six months. After tivo folks pointed out the original title wasn't accurate he still even keeps at it- kind of almost like he has an axe to grind.

Just curious, that's all.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

MichaelK said:


> I know stock talk isn't allowed so I wont get into the stock specifics but after reading this thread i need to ask:
> 
> HDTivo- Do you short sell Tivo stock?
> 
> Just curious...


No



MichaelK said:


> LOL
> 
> I'm usually not into that at all.
> 
> ...


You want me to lie?



MichaelK said:


> After tivo folks pointed out the original title wasn't accurate he still even keeps at it- kind of almost like he has an axe to grind.
> 
> Just curious, that's all.


What happend was a TiVo person made an inappropriate comment on the subject in an area out of his expertise. I explained the difference between the way he looked at the numbers and the way I am, and invited someone knowledgeable and appropriate from TiVo to comment on the subject. No one from TiVo has had the guts to show up since then.


----------



## skanter (May 28, 2003)

HDTiVo said:


> Yes, when I did a comparison about six months ago, TWC was in the lead on Digital Cable penetration, but Comcast was right up there. Another striking thing about Cable DVR is the enormous (marginal) penetration of DVR per Digital Sub; at one point for TWC it was over 100% (!), and even this QTR it was over 90%.


Having just got the TWC DVR, I can understand why. For an additional $8.95/mo, you get 90 hrs SD (looks better than Tivo's Best) or 20 hrs HD, dual tuners, easy to use interface with most of Tivo's features. It's a no-brainer for anyone who has digital cable, and hard for Tivo to compete with...


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

HDTiVo said:


> No
> 
> You want me to lie?
> 
> What happend was a TiVo person made an inappropriate comment on the subject in an area out of his expertise. I explained the difference between the way he looked at the numbers and the way I am, and invited someone knowledgeable and appropriate from TiVo to comment on the subject. No one from TiVo has had the guts to show up since then.


live is good- i was just curious.


----------

