# Liberty Closes the Deal for DirecTV



## DAVIDGR (Oct 26, 2002)

:up:Not directly related to HD-DVRs, but some good news (as reported in the Wall Street Journal) that hopefully bodes well for the future.

*Liberty Closes the Deal for DirecTV*
Satellite-TV Provider
Seeks New Ways to Vie
Against Telecoms, Cable
By VISHESH KUMAR and JESSICA E. VASCELLARO
February 28, 2008; Page B4

It took Liberty Media Corp. more than 14 months to win regulatory approval for its purchase of a major stake in DirecTV Group Inc. from News Corp., a deal that finally closed yesterday. Now, Liberty faces a more-complex task: figuring out how the satellite-TV company can continue to compete with telecom and cable rivals able to sell packages of phone, video and high-speed Internet services.

The intensity of that competitive threat has only grown since late 2006, when News Corp. agreed to sell what is now a 41% stake in DirecTV, three years after taking effective control of the company. At the time, a decade-long growth spurt in satellite TV had begun to sputter under pressure from a more-aggressive cable industry and the entry of phone companies such as Verizon Communications Inc. into TV services.

Satellite doesn't have the technological capability to offer high-speed Internet or phone services as easily as phone and cable companies do. In the past two years, since cable and phone began aggressively selling these packages, both DirecTV and Dish Network Corp. have seen a sharp slowdown in subscriber additions. DirecTV's new-customer additions dropped from 1.2 million in 2005 to 800,000 in 2006, although that improved slightly to 900,000 last year. DirecTV finished last year with 16.8 million customers, making it the second-biggest TV provider in the U.S. after Comcast Corp.

"Ultimately, this will not be a battle just for video but for complete solutions," Standard & Poor's analyst Tuna Amobi said. "And if the new owners of DirecTV don't want to lose subscribers to cable or the telcos, that is worry No. 1 one for them."

Liberty Media Chief Executive Officer Greg Maffei wasn't available for comment. However, at a conference in January, he said the satellite service could withstand competition from cable and phone companies for several years thanks to its strong lineup of high-definition and sports programming. "They really found a niche that fits well," he said.

Indeed, analysts note that despite the slowdown, DirecTV is continuing to add TV customers at a time when competition from phone is causing some cable companies to lose them.

DirecTV CEO Chase Carey argues that DirecTV's television offerings can shine on their own strength. "People care deeply about their television experience, and if you can create a great service, then there is a lot more room for differentiation."

Mr. Carey notes that DirecTV plans to launch a video-on-demand service in the first half of this year, allowing customers to download content onto their digital video recorders through high-speed Internet connections. The offering will allow DirecTV to start to plug what has long been a key weakness when compared with cable players like Comcast, who are making on-demand programming a key selling point to consumers.

As expected, Liberty acquired the DirecTV stake by swapping a $10.1 billion stake in News Corp. for News Corp's stake in DirecTV, three regional sports networks and $625 million in cash. The deal ends a contentious period between Liberty Chairman John Malone and News Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch, longtime business allies whose relationship cooled when Liberty quietly accumulated an 19% voting stake in News Corp., posing a potential threat to the Murdoch family's control of News Corp.

Because News Corp. will cancel the shares it is buying back from Liberty (which include a hefty non-voting stake), the voting stake of its remaining shareholders will increase. The Murdoch family's stake will rise to about 38% from 31.2%. News Corp. owns Dow Jones & Co., publisher of The Wall Street Journal.

On closing the deal, Mr. Murdoch, who had been chairman of the satellite company, quit its board, as did two other News Corp. executives. Mr. Malone succeeded Mr. Murdoch as chairman, while Liberty CEO Mr. Maffei also joined the board, DirecTV said. Liberty will nominate another representative for the DirecTV board.

The transfer of control to Liberty will boost DirecTV's ability to compete with its rivals, according to Mr. Carey, who says the satellite company will have more flexibility to focus on its own strategy. He hinted that under News Corp.'s oversight, DirecTV had been run with an eye to how it affected News Corp.'s media assets.

"News Corp. had so many businesses, and it was how those businesses related to DirecTV and also what made sense for News Corp.'s own overall strategy," Mr. Carey said.

The media giant was able to use the satellite service as a launching pad for starting new TV channels, such as the Fox Reality Channel, which went on air in 2005. Under News Corp.'s oversight, the satellite-TV service embarked on an aggressive effort aimed at boosting subscribers more than 20% within three years. A News Corp. representative wasn't available to comment.

News Corp. bought its initial stake in DirecTV in 2003. While the satellite service's subscriber count grew nearly 40% under News Corp.'s oversight, DirecTV has had to battle high churn rates, or the percentage of customers turning off their service every quarter.

In recent months, DirecTV has changed its subscriber-growth strategy, focusing more on higher-income customers able to pay for premium services like digital video recorders. In August, the company tightened its screening standards for new customers by requiring credit cards or large upfront deposits in order to sign up. The move limited the number of gross customer additions for the company in subsequent quarters, said DirecTV Chief Financial Officer Patrick Doyle.

More-affluent customers are less likely to cut off service in an economic downturn. The move paid off. DirecTV reported its highest revenue per customer during its last quarter, while at the same time noting that churn was the lowest in eight years.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

For any idea of what the plans are for 2008... and some of plans for 2009/2010...

http://library.corporate-ir.net/library/12/127/127160/items/281632/001_DirecTV_Master_v1.pdf

This is the presentation from todays Investor Event.

You can go to www.directv.com, to access the actual webcast and Q/A period.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

Hopefully there will be either a comment or an answer to a question in the next few weeks: Is Directv open to an upgrade to the 10-250 HDtivo?


----------



## jimb726 (Jan 4, 2007)

Cudahy said:


> Hopefully there will be either a comment or an answer to a question in the next few weeks: Is Directv open to an upgrade to the 10-250 HDtivo?


Uh, I think that has been answered over and over again, and then punctuated with the acquisition of ReplayTV. I saw today where DirecTV expects 50% of there customers to have some sort of advanced services by the end of the year. Either HD or DVR or both.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

Actually it hasn't been answered or even addressed in the last 6 months since the story about "ongoing negotiations" about upgrading Tivo on Directv. Maybe now it will be.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

Cudahy said:


> Actually it hasn't been answered or even addressed in the last 6 months since the story about "ongoing negotiations" about upgrading Tivo on Directv. Maybe now it will be.


I guess the reason why it hasn't been addressed...
As it was a just a story, that was not validated or confirmed by DirecTV...

And I am not sure how much more writing on the wall needs to be there.

DirecTV does still have an active agreement with TiVo, Inc... for the continuing support of their existing platform.

-) If the purchase of ReplayTV IP... didn't convince you...
-) And today's investor relationship meeting, which clearly showed their planned path for a SINGLE unit platform...

Would a phone call from Chase Carey telling you that TiVo and DirecTV are not going to be building a new system, finally convince you?


----------



## JoeBarbs (Dec 1, 2003)

ebonovic said:


> Would a phone call from Chase Carey telling you that TiVo and DirecTV are not going to be building a new system, finally convince you?


A phone call from Chase Carey would be meaningless right about now. Malone will do some house cleaning soon enough and I'm sure Chase won't survive the dusting.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

JoeBarbs said:


> A phone call from Chase Carey would be meaningless right about now. Malone will do some house cleaning soon enough and I'm sure Chase won't survive the dusting.


You do realize that Chase Carey recently received a 3 year extension.

And John Malone had input to that extension and commented on it at the Liberty Group session a few months back.

Malone is just the largest stock holder... but he doesn't hold a majority.
There is still a board that has to decide on things like that.

DirecTV Group is a company that has stock opportunities, and Malone holds the largest chunk of them.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

Cudahy said:


> Hopefully there will be either a comment or an answer to a question in the next few weeks: Is Directv open to an upgrade to the 10-250 HDtivo?


As we've been telling you over and over it's dead. Give it up.

Today there was a nearly 5 hour investor conference call which outlined DirecTV going forward for the next 2-3+ years. Tivo was mentioned once in regards to the online scheduler upgrade upcoming.

The entire technology plan going forward is all based on the HR20/21. They are actually going to eliminate all SD receivers and have HD capable boxes only by end of 08 or into 09. And eventually in 09/10 there will just be one receiver, the HD DVR for everyone. There won't even be any basic non DVR receivers at all. There will just be one receiver that everyone gets, the HR2x (or maybe HR30 by then).

The entire cornerstone of their technology strategy is the HR20/21 (and it's eventual replacement). Do you get it yet? It's what many people have been saying for a long, long time.

Lots of details and discussion at DBSTalk as the call was blogged live and here is a link Earl posted in another thread to the PDF slides: http://library.corporate-ir.net/library/12/127/127160/items/281632/001_DirecTV_Master_v1.pdf

Page 37 starts the details on the receiver strategy. And it's pretty obvious that Tivo is not in the plans. I hope everyone finally gets it but probably not.


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

Cudahy said:


> Hopefully there will be either a comment or an answer to a question in the next few weeks: Is Directv open to an upgrade to the 10-250 HDtivo?


No matter what, doubt there will be an upgrade to the 10-250, it does not have the hardware to support the new format. add to the fact directv just announced their latest in the Hr2X line - the HR21-100

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=121332


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

DirecTV + TiVo is as dead as HD DVD is. DirecTV has no interest in working with TiVo for future solutions. Why share the pie with someone else when you can have it all for yourself?


If TiVo was a little smarter they'd be lobbying the FCC and others in Washington to make sure that both Satellite providers had to provide some sort of cable card type solution so that TiVo could make boxes that would work with both satellite providers. That hasn't happened though, with both satellite providers getting passes from the FCC on the whole cable card type requirement.

The current TiVo boxes will keep working as standard definition DVRs into the future, but HD solutions that include TiVo will not be forthcoming for DirecTV and that ain't gonna change no matter how much a small set of fans hope otherwise.


*for the record, I was a fan of HD DVD, have bought more HD DVD content even after the announcement of the death of the format, and even bought a couple of players knowing the format was dieing or would be dead. But I recognize that the format is dead and no amount of buying content will change that.

**Also for the record, members of my family have stock (in IRA accounts) in TiVo. I like the company, wish them all the best, but get my HD programming from DirecTV. While my wife and daughter continue to use our HR10-250 for their Standard Def needs, I use an HR20 and HR21 and get along great with both of them.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

It's coming I tell you, it's coming. There will be a new DirecTivo soon. You just have to believe. Never give up hope. Never.


----------



## Da Goon (Oct 22, 2006)

bdowell said:


> DirecTV + TiVo is as dead as HD DVD is.


HA! Yep, sad but true.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

HiDefGator said:


> It's coming I tell you, it's coming. There will be a new DirecTivo soon. You just have to believe. Never give up hope. Never.


Yeah, and Star Trek: The Original Series, season two complete set is coming out on HD DVD discs too. 

Oooops, wait.  No, it isn't. :down:


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

shibby191 said:


> Lots of details and discussion at DBSTalk as the call was blogged live and here is a link Earl posted in another thread to the PDF slides: http://library.corporate-ir.net/library/12/127/127160/items/281632/001_DirecTV_Master_v1.pdf
> 
> Page 37 starts the details on the receiver strategy. And it's pretty obvious that Tivo is not in the plans. I hope everyone finally gets it but probably not.


Page 18 is interesting. Churn among DVR and HD customers has increased from .6% in 2005 to .8% in 2007. I can tell you why I churned out, any guesses on the rest? 

Page 20 also shows that their improvement in overall churn has been entirely based on involuntary churn, which has nothing to do with customer satisfaction. Voluntary churn has remained essentially flat in spite of a massive HD upgrade and substantial increases in upgrade and retention spending.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

ebonovic said:


> -) And today's investor relationship meeting, which clearly showed their planned path for a SINGLE unit platform...


The HR20/21 hardware is sufficient to receive a port of TiVo software for DVR services, much like the Motorola and Scientific Atlanta cable DVR units are sufficient to receive a port of TiVo software, too.

Not saying there is anything planned or under development. But it most certainly does NOT require new hardware to accomplish.


----------



## bigpuma (Aug 12, 2003)

dswallow said:


> The HR20/21 hardware is sufficient to receive a port of TiVo software for DVR services, much like the Motorola and Scientific Atlanta cable DVR units are sufficient to receive a port of TiVo software, too.
> 
> Not saying there is anything planned or under development. But it most certainly does NOT require new hardware to accomplish.


Sure, but it seems pretty clear that DirecTV's plan is to have everyone on the same hardware and software to make technical support more efficient. I don't see why they would want to add complexity at this point.


----------



## bigpuma (Aug 12, 2003)

nrc said:


> Page 18 is interesting. Churn among DVR and HD customers has increased from .6% in 2005 to .8% in 2007. I can tell you why I churned out, any guesses on the rest?
> 
> Page 20 also shows that their improvement in overall churn has been entirely based on involuntary churn, which has nothing to do with customer satisfaction. Voluntary churn has remained essentially flat in spite of a massive HD upgrade and substantial increases in upgrade and retention spending.


I have no doubt that a number of people have cancelled D* because of TiVo but as you point out despite those people leaving voluntary churn has remained flat. Not nearly enough people cancelled due to TiVo to make DirecTV re-think their decision.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

if there is going to be a Tivo HD box that supports Directv or Dish... this is the only way it's going to happen. if you want it.... you better start writing your representatives in Washington.



bdowell said:


> If TiVo was a little smarter they'd be lobbying the FCC and others in Washington to make sure that both Satellite providers had to provide some sort of cable card type solution so that TiVo could make boxes that would work with both satellite providers. That hasn't happened though, with both satellite providers getting passes from the FCC on the whole cable card type requirement.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

If Malone agrees that losing a few hundred thousand subscribers over the next 2 years doesn't matter then you guys are right. 
The extra cost would be easily covered by a larger DVR fee for the Tivo so there is no rational economic reason for them to demand that Directv subscribers have no choice. Still, I recognize that businessmen make bad economic decisions all the time.


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

HiDefGator said:


> It's coming I tell you, it's coming. There will be a new DirecTivo soon. You just have to believe. Never give up hope. Never.


About the same time that the brand new design of the Betamax video tape player hits the streets along with the 2009 Edsel


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

Cudahy said:


> If Malone agrees that losing a few hundred thousand subscribers over the next 2 years doesn't matter then you guys are right.
> The extra cost would be easily covered by a larger DVR fee for the Tivo so there is no rational economic reason for them to demand that Directv subscribers have no choice. Still, I recognize that businessmen make bad economic decisions all the time.


What few "hundred thousand"

There are less then 100k HR10-250 left in activation (as of last check about 3 months ago).

The SDDtivos are not going anywhere... and haven't seen any type of significant subscriber drop.

Where will over 10's of millions of dollar in R&D and expense be recouped from?

If say there where only 250,000 users getting the unit (the peak for the HR10-250 platform)... The initial cost of the singal unit? An extra $5 per month on the DVR fee, which you can be certain TiVo would want a bigger cut from?


----------



## jimb726 (Jan 4, 2007)

Cudahy said:


> If Malone agrees that losing a few hundred thousand subscribers over the next 2 years doesn't matter then you guys are right.
> The extra cost would be easily covered by a larger DVR fee for the Tivo so there is no rational economic reason for them to demand that Directv subscribers have no choice. Still, I recognize that businessmen make bad economic decisions all the time.


Certainly you cant be implying that every customer that is leaving is doing so because there isnt a TiVo option offered. I would think that there would be no way to even try to tie a number to that. Other than the people on this board who have stated that they left for that reason and that is hardly representative of the overall base.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

Cudahy said:


> If Malone agrees that losing a few hundred thousand subscribers over the next 2 years doesn't matter then you guys are right.
> The extra cost would be easily covered by a larger DVR fee for the Tivo so there is no rational economic reason for them to demand that Directv subscribers have no choice. Still, I recognize that businessmen make bad economic decisions all the time.


Why do you continue to put your head in the sand and not understand business? It's pretty obvious you don't understand any of this from a business perspective. The whole plan is to get down to *one* hardware platform and *one* software UI. Period. This has many effeciencies and reduces costs across the board. Why would you mess that all up and introduce a 2nd software platform and toss out all those effeciencies and cost savings all for less then 100K customers? Which by the way will just churn out with the normal churn and not even be noticed which is seen in the low churn rates, lowest in the entire industry.

But hey, keep telling yourself it makes financial sense. Perhaps in Second Life it does.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

Putting a Tivo interface over the current DirectvDVR hardware is not the big deal you guys are carrying on about. 
A lot of the 2,350,000 current Tivo SD subscribers are going to be unhappy about giving up their Tivo to go HD, not to mention the over 100,000 HDtivo subscribers like myself that are still hoping to stay with Directv. If anything my guess of 200,000 loss is understated. 
The elephant in the room is that Directv has absolutely nothing to lose by reaching an agreement with Tivo. Murdoch simply made a bad business decision by trying to impose a no choice DVR.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Once DirecTV ships the USB/Windows-based add-on tuning device, you should soon see some third-party development for devices such as TiVo that will support DirecTV programming.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

dswallow said:


> Once DirecTV ships the USB/Windows-based add-on tuning device, you should soon see some third-party development for devices such as TiVo that will support DirecTV programming.


Unless it is specifically tied to one software package.
Which is what it appears to be, since the current hang up ... is Microsoft not completing their piece of the solution


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

Cudahy said:


> Putting a Tivo interface over the current DirectvDVR hardware is not the big deal you guys are carrying on about.
> A lot of the 2,350,000 current Tivo SD subscribers are going to be unhappy about giving up their Tivo to go HD, not to mention the over 100,000 HDtivo subscribers like myself that are still hoping to stay with Directv. If anything my guess of 200,000 loss is understated.
> The elephant in the room is that Directv has absolutely nothing to lose by reaching an agreement with Tivo. Murdoch simply made a bad business decision by trying to impose a no choice DVR.


They have a TON to lose... as in raw $$$$$
Let alone, the cost of on going support of two very different platforms.
Incompatibility of DirecTV features (Such as DoD, Remote Booking, or the planned MRV and PC Playback options).
The inherited in-secure structure of the TiVo platform (how easy is it to extract stuff, and hack and add your own features)?
Since there has been no mass-exedious because of the lack of a TiVo-HD... what makes you think there would be a mass-influx of users because of TiVo-HD?

And yes... it would be a big deal to do it.
It has taken almost 3 years to get it into the motorola platform.

It is not a trivial task by any means. Might not take 3 years, but certainly isn't a "short" period of time. To think otherwise... is just wishfull thinking.

There is absolutely no public research to support/deny the basis that TiVo has any impact on future/current subscriber count/growth, on the large scale of magnitudes.

What if those 2.5 million people never move to HD?


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

Thanks for the link to the document. It was quite interesting to read. And I certainly feel justified about my previous conclusions - page 72 - new user interface coming in 2009


----------



## llarch (May 7, 2004)

shibby191 said:


> The whole plan is to get down to *one* hardware platform and *one* software UI. Period.


Even though I doubt a new DTV HD TiVo will ever come out, I have to point out that having a company goal of getting to a single platform is easier said than done, just ask Microsoft. Sure there are many benefits getting to a single platform but it will take a lot of time and money (a lot), don't be surprised if they never get there.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

RS4 said:


> Thanks for the link to the document. It was quite interesting to read. And I certainly feel justified about my previous conclusions - page 72 - new user interface coming in 2009


Justified in what? The new UI definately isn't Tivo. They said that much in the investor call.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

llarch said:


> Even though I doubt a new DTV HD TiVo will ever come out, I have to point out that having a company goal of getting to a single platform is easier said than done, just ask Microsoft. Sure there are many benefits getting to a single platform but it will take a lot of time and money (a lot), don't be surprised if they never get there.


Well, they are already there for the most part. All current receivers for DirecTV already have the exact same software UI. So that part is done. Now all they need to do is wait for the costs of the HD hardware to drop in price enough that they will then just dump the SD receivers all together. All new SD locals are already in MPEG4 only thus even if you do not have an HDTV you need an HD receiver to get the SD locals.

So they are already on the fast track to get there, it's just a matter of time for costs to drop further on HD hardware to make the total switch.


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

shibby191 said:


> Justified in what? ...


Rushed to market, not well thought out ...


----------



## bigpuma (Aug 12, 2003)

llarch said:


> Even though I doubt a new DTV HD TiVo will ever come out, I have to point out that having a company goal of getting to a single platform is easier said than done, just ask Microsoft. Sure there are many benefits getting to a single platform but it will take a lot of time and money (a lot), don't be surprised if they never get there.


I really doubt it is that difficult. They just have to start only giving out the HR21. The reason they are waiting is costs. As hardware costs drop it will be easier for them to only give out one box.


----------



## jimb726 (Jan 4, 2007)

RS4 said:


> Rushed to market, not well thought out ...


Of all of the things that went wrong with the initial launch I think the UI was the least of them all. I actually like this one, so for me at least I am sure the change is gonna suck.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

jimb726 said:


> Of all of the things that went wrong with the initial launch I think the UI was the least of them all. I actually like this one, so for me at least I am sure the change is gonna suck.


IIRC... 2 years ago, they talked about a new UI...
That new UI, was what we see today in the new GUI... The new color scheme, a few changes... but nothing major.

As of right now, there is nothing to indicate that the new one in 2009 would be radically different then what we have today.


----------



## jimb726 (Jan 4, 2007)

ebonovic said:


> IIRC... 2 years ago, they talked about a new UI...
> That new UI, was what we see today in the new GUI... The new color scheme, a few changes... but nothing major.
> 
> As of right now, there is nothing to indicate that the new one in 2009 would be radically different then what we have today.


Well thats good news. I really like this one.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

RS4 said:


> Rushed to market, not well thought out ...


Ummm, like Tivo hasn't ever had UI updates?  

Please. A company that doesn't improve their UI over time is just stagnant. Every provider improves their UI every couple years. The original HR20 UI was a direct port of the R15 and standard non DVR receivers UI that had been around for a couple years. And there was a major update to it last fall that was for *all* of their entire receiver line. Remember that all their receivers use the same UI now. Only the old DirecTivo's and UTV's (along with any really old receivers) are the exceptions.

So maybe the HR20 was rushed to market, but the UI has nothing to do with it.

Think before you type. 

Besides, what does rushed to market have anything to do with where we are today, 2 years later? I guess if you want to just live in the past...


----------



## llarch (May 7, 2004)

bigpuma said:


> I really doubt it is that difficult. QUOTE]
> 
> Replacing 20 million or so regular receivers with DVRs not that difficult? Totally disagree. Just look how much time and money was spent getting a much smaller number of people off the HR10, and there are still a bunch of people who have not moved for various reasons. Sure, a major hardware switch could be done, not arguing that, but to say it is not that difficult is way off (in my opinion).


----------



## bigpuma (Aug 12, 2003)

llarch said:


> bigpuma said:
> 
> 
> > I really doubt it is that difficult.
> ...


Who said anything about replacing receivers? They currently only offer a few receivers all running basically the same software now. Eventually you will only be able to get one receiver from D* and eventually people will migrate away from their current receivers as they break down. D* might decide at some point to replace the older receivers but by then it will be a much smaller number.


----------



## llarch (May 7, 2004)

bigpuma said:


> Who said anything about replacing receivers? They currently only offer a few receivers all running basically the same software now. Eventually you will only be able to get one receiver from D* and eventually people will migrate away from their current receivers as they break down. D* might decide at some point to replace the older receivers but by then it will be a much smaller number.


It depends on the timeframe D has in mind; plain receivers (in general) don't break, I've had some for almost 10 years. So if D plans to wait for all the plain receivers to break, it will be a while for any kind of big change in the installed platform. If they plan on pushing by replacing, that will speed the process, but it will still take time and cost a lot. Now, if they are only talking about a convergent equipment offering with no expectations about big change in the installed platform, then sure, that's not really a big deal, but then the justification of fewer platforms to support won't be there for years.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

It's also a huge fallacy to believe the current hardware platform will be stagnant. There will ALWAYS be multiple hardware platforms, and thus multiple software versions, and different UI's because of that.

If the HR21 were redesigned today, it'd be smaller, faster, more capable and cost less to manufacture. There will be a point they have no choice but to do that as it will eventually become difficult to obtain parts used in the current machine as newer versions of those parts are designed, introduced and enter mass production and/or newer parts, incompatible with the existing system, become available that are significantly less expensive to use.

Just as an example, look at how new memory technology gets introduced, mass produced and becomes really inexpensive to purchase but memory technology from 5 or 10 years ago becomes much more expensive per-megabyte.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

dswallow said:


> It's also a huge fallacy to believe the current hardware platform will be stagnant. There will ALWAYS be multiple hardware platforms, and thus multiple software versions, and different UI's because of that.
> 
> If the HR21 were redesigned today, it'd be smaller, faster, more capable and cost less to manufacture. There will be a point they have no choice but to do that as it will eventually become difficult to obtain parts used in the current machine as newer versions of those parts are designed, introduced and enter mass production and/or newer parts, incompatible with the existing system, become available that are significantly less expensive to use.
> 
> Just as an example, look at how new memory technology gets introduced, mass produced and becomes really inexpensive to purchase but memory technology from 5 or 10 years ago becomes much more expensive per-megabyte.


It definitely won't stay stagnate. HR20 will be 2 years old this summer. HR21 will be moving on 1 year old. I would expect by 2010 we'd be looking at the "HR30" or something as the next generation. But the UI certainly doesn't need to change. Look at it today: Every single current receiver from the SD basics (D11, D12) to the SD DVR (R15, R16) to the HD basic (H20, H21) and the HD DVR (HR20, HR21) *all* have the same UI. That is the synergy they are looking for and they already have it now software/UI wise.

Now the next step is to slowly over the next couple years pair down all that hardware down to just one hardware platform, an HD DVR, which by then may be whatever replaces the HR20/21 series.


----------



## cramer (Aug 14, 2000)

llarch said:


> Just look how much time and money was spent getting a much smaller number of people off the HR10, and there are still a bunch of people who have not moved for various reasons.


Indeed. And half of them are still in use. I'd be surprised if even 1/4 of the HR10 owners (leasee's) had been approached for upgrade/replacement. I have an HR10, and DTV hasn't said one word to me about it.

They haven't had a huge amount of churn from HR10 subscribers for at least two reasons... 1) there simply aren't that many of us. And 2) many are SD tivo users as well, so they won't necessarily drop DTV all together. When they try to push the non-tivo interface on the 2+ million SD tivo subscribers, it'll be a different story. A great many of those subscribers are DTV customers _because of Tivo_. Take away the tivo part of the equation, and you lose customers. (you'll certainly lose this "teir 5" customer.)

Yes, DTV _is_ losing customers as a result of dropping tivo powered DVRs. Yes, they know how many... they ask when you cancel. Even if Ed's sleeping with the entire board of directors, They. Will. Not. Tell.

If you want to give us some useful numbers, ask for these:
 How many HR10's were ever manufactured?
 How many of those have ever been activated? On how many accounts?
 How many of those accounts also have SD Tivo(s)?
 How many of the active HR10's have been offered an upgrade?
 How many refused? (broken out by those who have other tivos vs. not)
 How many of the upgrades are actually being used? How many ate the penalty and left anyway?
 And how many HR10 subscribers are no longer DTV customers?


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

shibby191 said:


> Ummm, like Tivo hasn't ever had UI updates?
> 
> Please. A company that doesn't improve their UI over time is just stagnant. Every provider improves their UI every couple years. The original HR20 UI was a direct port of the R15 and standard non DVR receivers UI that had been around for a couple years. And there was a major update to it last fall that was for *all* of their entire receiver line. Remember that all their receivers use the same UI now. Only the old DirecTivo's and UTV's (along with any really old receivers) are the exceptions.
> 
> ...


Come on now - do you honestly think they would even mention this if they didn't realize that their UI isn't being widely accepted? Especially when it's going to take them that long to re-write it

This is no trivial matter like you guys try to make it. This was a forward-looking document, outlining major goals, not some color change on a screen.


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

RS4 said:


> Come on now - do you honestly think they would even mention this if they didn't realize that their UI isn't being widely accepted? Especially when it's going to take them that long to re-write it
> 
> This is no trivial matter like you guys try to make it. This was a forward-looking document, outlining major goals, not some color change on a screen.


Least it is better then the Windows 3.0 looking UI that was on the previous HR10 and they are working on enchancing, so you are right it is a forward looking document


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

RS4 said:


> Come on now - do you honestly think they would even mention this if they didn't realize that their UI isn't being widely accepted? Especially when it's going to take them that long to re-write it
> 
> This is no trivial matter like you guys try to make it. This was a forward-looking document, outlining major goals, not some color change on a screen.


Ummmm, if that were in fact the case isn't a good thing that they are listening to their customers?


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

shibby191 said:


> Ummmm, if that were in fact the case isn't a good thing that they are listening to their customers?


Gosh, why would they start that now ... does DLB ring a bell?


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

RS4 said:


> Gosh, why would they start that now ... does DLB ring a bell?


I wonder if DTV's lack of DLB has anything to do with concern for patent infringement. Like there is some technical requirement to have DLB, but doing so just steps all over TiVo's patents. I wonder because most every other DVR out there has DLB, don't they? Do the DISH DVRs have it? Do the cable generics from Motorola and Cisco have it?

I find it strange that such a simple thing, dual tuner DVR should buffer both tuners, is so blatantly missing from DTV's latest hardware. Especially when they of course had this when they offered TiVo DVRs. It looks to me like they are having to purposefully step around some things. DLB being one of them.


----------



## charlz092270 (Sep 11, 2003)

Quick comment. I have had no less than 3 SD DTivo's in the house and an HR10-250 from the start. I'm down to 1 remaining SD DTivo, the HR10 is relegated to SD usage in the Kitchen and there are 3 HR20/HR21's in the house now. The HR2x interface and capabilities are far superior to the HR10/SD DTivos. Remote booking/DoD/etc. Suggestions have little to no value. I'd rather be able to watch what I want, when I want. Oh, and in HD too.

Tivo Fanboys take note: I was one of you. The I got my first HR20. I then realized the error of my ways. The HR2x beats anything Tivo has done for D* hands down.


----------



## fasTLane (Nov 25, 2005)

LOL yet again.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

20TIL6 said:


> I wonder if DTV's lack of DLB has anything to do with concern for patent infringement. Like there is some technical requirement to have DLB, but doing so just steps all over TiVo's patents. I wonder because most every other DVR out there has DLB, don't they? Do the DISH DVRs have it? Do the cable generics from Motorola and Cisco have it?
> 
> I find it strange that such a simple thing, dual tuner DVR should buffer both tuners, is so blatantly missing from DTV's latest hardware. Especially when they of course had this when they offered TiVo DVRs. It looks to me like they are having to purposefully step around some things. DLB being one of them.


I think you have to put it in perspective. At the time the HR20 came out without DLB many current DTivo users, myself included, didn't even know we had DLB as a feature.


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

HiDefGator said:


> I think you have to put it in perspective. At the time the HR20 came out without DLB many current DTivo users, myself included, didn't even know we had DLB as a feature.


Maybe, but if you had Sunday Ticket (which I had), you made use of DLB a lot. Even if a person was not aware of the term "DLB", they knew they could keep track of two football games at the same time without locking either tuner into recording anything. Without locking the tuner, you could "float" between pairs of games very easily.

DLB goes hand in hand with Sunday Ticket. It's probably the best demand and execution of it. I've got to think there is a major reason why DTV still lacks something they offered so "matter of factly" that most of their customers did not realize they had it.


----------



## easy-e (Feb 23, 2005)

IMO - TiVo's long-term strategy should focus on software and not hardware. I think that is where they future lies. I just don't think they've figured that out yet.


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

easy-e said:


> IMO - TiVo's long-term strategy should focus on software and not hardware. I think that is where they future lies. I just don't think they've figured that out yet.


I don't think a lot of the DTivo users realize how many features Direct did not allow compared to the stand alone Tivos. I know I had read about folks upgrading their DTivos, but I never bothered to and I would guess most of the DTivo users are the same as me. So, I was quite pleased to actually see and use the features such as MRV, Unbox, and Tivocast.

I can't understand why Direct didn't offer these features - even at a premium. I have no idea if it was due to costs, legal issues, or afraid of losing control to Tivo, but in any case, it made me even more glad to have left Direct and to be using a real Tivo for a change. I feel it's just another example of Direct not paying any attention to the customer. They have really slipped from being a top-tier technology vendor to just another company in my opinion.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

RS4 said:


> I can't understand why Direct didn't offer these features - even at a premium.


Only my opinion, but my guess has always been support costs and lack of demand for the advanced features. With the majority of new dvr users having never had a dvr before why should Directv bend over backwards to offer every feature imaginable?

The premium idea just doesn't fly in the real world. Not enough users would agree to pay for them to justify the costs to offer them. As the dvr market matures users will start to expect the advanced features.

Another possibility is Tivo may not have wanted DirecTivo's to have all the features a standalone did. They do get a lot more money from standalones than from DirecTivo's.


----------



## Gunnyman (Jul 10, 2003)

I have said and will repeat here,
If DTV or Tivo would have allowed me to either subscribe or buy lifetime for the same features Standalone users have I would do it. I still would.

I'm not switching service until I get an HDTV. when taht happens I have some evaluating to do.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

llarch said:


> If they plan on pushing by replacing, that will speed the process, but it will still take time and cost a lot.


I can't comment on the cost, because there are also support savings by switching. But as far as the time factor, that is not an issue. I recall when they did the last big access card swap, some people said it would take years and yet they did it in a few months. And that was every single receiver.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Mark Lopez said:


> I can't comment on the cost, because there are also support savings by switching. But as far as the time factor, that is not an issue. I recall when they did the last big access card swap, some people said it would take years and yet they did it in a few months. And that was every single receiver.


Unless they've done another access card swap since January 2007 they've never finished an access card swap in mere months... and they've really never done one completely before they end up starting another.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

dswallow said:


> ...they've never finished an access card swap in mere months... and they've really never done one completely before they end up starting another.


Sure they have. From the first big swap in 2002:



> DirecTV Inc. last week said it started mailing replacement smart cards to its more than 10 million direct-broadcast satellite customers.
> 
> The swap-out marks the fourth generation of smart cards since the direct-broadcast satellite service launched in 1994. *DirecTV plans to distribute more than 15 million smart cards over the next six months*.


Then again in late 2003



> Modified DirecTV access cards were no longer available because DirecTV had performed a *successful card swap in late 2003 and early 2004.*
> 
> In the card swap, *DirecTV sent out new and improved smartcards to all of its subscribers* .....


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Mark Lopez said:


> Sure they have. From the first big swap in 2002:
> 
> Then again in late 2003


You're going from claims? I'd been a subscriber since DirecTV's inception through January 2007, and no announced card swap was ever completed within a year, and no announced card swap ever was finished completely before they started doing it again.

For whatever reason, their security changes were just about always overlapped one or two generations. There was a point where they did a major security change, but even then they didn't turn off the old system completely until they'd actually started selling receivers with a yet-newer card than they'd just been sending out as replacements to "everyone."


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

dswallow said:


> You're going from claims?
> 
> ....and no announced card swap was ever completed within a year


No, I'm going from first hand experience. And do you think the links I provided (just the fist couple I Googled) just made it up?

For a while I was 'following'  the card hack circuit. The 2003 swap was done very quickly. I hate to say it, but you are wrong. BTW, I've also been a subscriber since nearly the begining.

In any case, the point was that they have the capability to do a massive swap in a short period if they want to. And we are not talking about every receiver this time, just the obsolete ones.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Mark Lopez said:


> No, I'm going from first hand experience. And do you think the links I provided (just the fist couple I Googled) just made it up?
> 
> For a while I was 'following'  the card hack circuit. The 2003 swap was done very quickly. I hate to say it, but you are wrong. BTW, I've also been a subscriber since nearly the begining.
> 
> In any case, the point was that they have the capability to do a massive swap in a short period if they want to. And we are not talking about every receiver this time, just the obsolete ones.


Well, you're wrong. I've got first hand knowledge. I followed those things as well.

I agree they can do it quickly... in theory. Because they never have done it quickly yet; they've several times rushed off like they planned to do it very quickly, then they'd leave the old datastream alive and there'd still be many people actively using the supposedly-being-replaced cards. It always has seemed their intent was to stop activating receivers with older cards completely, but they just weren't in all that much of a rush to swap out existing cards in activated receivers 100%.


----------



## cramer (Aug 14, 2000)

HiDefGator said:


> Only my opinion, but my guess has always been support costs and lack of demand for the advanced features.


Not likely. In the early days, it was the immortal fear of a network interface and thus people stealing content off the systems. (which happened anyway. even on non-tivo's.)



> The premium idea just doesn't fly in the real world. Not enough users would agree to pay for them to justify the costs to offer them.


I gotta laugh at that one. How many people payed Tivo, Inc. for the "Home Media Option" back before they started giving it away? Obviously enough to justify coding HMO.



> Another possibility is Tivo may not have wanted DirecTivo's to have all the features a standalone did. They do get a lot more money from standalones than from DirecTivo's.


Tivo, Inc. makes TONS more money from DTV. They make (or made) more off DTV per _month_ than all of the SA's per _year_. Keep in mind, there are/were millions of DTivos and only a few 100k SA's.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

dswallow said:


> Well, you're wrong. I've got first hand knowledge. I followed those things as well.
> 
> I agree they can do it quickly... in theory. Because they never have done it quickly yet; they've several times rushed off like they planned to do it very quickly, then they'd leave the old datastream alive and there'd still be many people actively using the supposedly-being-replaced cards. It always has seemed their intent was to stop activating receivers with older cards completely, but they just weren't in all that much of a rush to swap out existing cards in activated receivers 100%.


Again, the point is that if they needed to swap out a few million receivers (and had them available) they could do so very quickly. With the P4 there were still a lot of receivers sitting on store shelves and in warehouses that with older cards that needed to be taken care of too which slowed things somewhat. But the bottom line still was:



> .....the company finished a wholesale swap-out of 17 million older access cards and shut down its legacy data stream


Call it 'in theory' if you want, but they did it.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Mark Lopez said:


> Again, the point is that if they needed to swap out a few million receivers (and had them available) they could do so very quickly. With the P4 there were still a lot of receivers sitting on store shelves and in warehouses that with older cards that needed to be taken care of too which slowed things somewhat. But the bottom line still was:
> 
> Call it 'in theory' if you want, but they did it.


From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DirecTV:



> * P1, also known as F cards, were used until 1997. F cards have a picture of a satellite on the front.
> * P2, also known as H cards, were introduced in 1996 and eventually replaced F cards. H cards look the same as F cards. H cards were in use until 2002.
> * P3, also known as HU cards, were introduced in 1999 and were used until April, 2004. HU cards have a picture of a football player on the front. HU cards originally shipped with receivers with serial numbers above 0001 700 000. These were removed from circulation due to high piracy plaguing the system.
> * P4 cards were introduced in 2002 and are currently still in use. P4 cards are labeled "Access Card: 4."
> ...


P1: through 1997
P2: 1996 through 2002
P3: 1999 through 4/2004
P4: 2002 through today
D1: 2004 through (today?)
D2/P12: 2005 through today


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

dswallow said:


> P1: through 1997
> P2: 1996 through 2002
> P3: 1999 through 4/2004
> P4: 2002 through today
> ...


 Not sure what your point is. The bottom line is still that DirecTV has the cabability do do large scale swaps. Thay have done so in the past and they can do so in the future. The number of receivers needing to be swapped (if they wanted to and had them avaialable) is not as large as a complete card swap and could easily be done in just a few months.

Now, I agree that there are other issues to consider like needing to do dish upgrades too and support issues, but if they just wanted to get the receivers swapped asap, they could do it. The big argument during the card swap was that there would be no way for them to physically send out that many that quickly. The counter point (which proved to be accurate) was that if they can send out millions of bills each month, they certainly can print out shipping lables.

But all this is getting off topic. Regardless of how long it takes, 6 months, 12 or 18, Tivo is still dead as far as DirecTV is concerned.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Mark Lopez said:


> Not sure what your point is. The bottom line is still that DirecTV has the cabability do do large scale swaps. Thay have done so in the past and they can do so in the future. The number of receivers needing to be swapped (if they wanted to and had them avaialable) is not as large as a complete card swap and could easily be done in just a few months.


The point was just that you kept saying DirecTV could do it quickly. I agree, in theory, they should be able to do a card swap quickly. But, for whatever reason, they have never done so... they've generally dragged out at a year or more. And it's not that they get them to everyone and some just never install them and DirecTV lets it slide till the next swap -- people were regularly reporting never having even received them to swap.


----------

