TiVo Community Forum

TiVo Community Forum Archive 2
Covering threads with a last post date between
July 1, 2004 and December 31, 2005.
THIS IS A READ ONLY SITE
 


 

SEARCH  |  ARCHIVE 1 MAIN SITE

 
Forum Jump
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-07-2004, 07:29 AM   #121 (Print)
GoodSpike
Registered User
 
GoodSpike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 13,091
Quote:
Originally posted by pgogborn
I do not mind if you want to take a swipe at something I have posted, but if you do, I think you should accurately represent the full flavor of what I post

I did not post "discussing 'vaporware' might be banned stock stock".

I posted "what I would really like to say about 'vaporware', 'product announcements', call it what you will, and TiVo Inc. would fall under the heading of stock talk".

As a starter, which I think would fall on the OK side of the boundary, I would draw a graph plotting TiVo stock price against product and other announcements.


I think what they want to avoid by the stock talk rule is people coming in here discussing when to buy/sell certain stocks--turning it into that kind of a forum. And I'd also think discussions that pertain to Tivo would probably be allowed that might not apply to other stocks (e.g. you'd be more likely to be okay talking about Tivo turning a profit in a particular quarter than AMD turning a profit, or cost reductions in producing Tivos compared to cost reductions for producing CPUs). The long term survival of Tivo as a company is a legitimate issue for this forum (although obviously it would have investment implications also--but so does the availability of HMO).

As to this particular topic (vaporware) I think you could easily attempt to show the announcements were attempts to support the stock price, without violating the rule. The point of such a discussion would presumably not be to suggest in investment strategy, but to show you think the product announcements were somehow not legitimate as product announcements but instead designed to support the stock price.

I'm actually having a hard time understanding how discussing vaporware could in any way violate the stock talk rule.

__________________
Valet Park-It Yourself
GoodSpike is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 07:46 AM   #122 (Print)
David Platt
Large Ebony Rooster
 
David Platt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 4,949
Send a message via AIM to David Platt
Quote:
I can't believe you call yourself a journalist. I certainly don't. I'm sure National Enquirer has a position available for you. Please do not come back here.


Quote:
You get your degree from a Cracker Jack box? Or should I ask if you have one?


So suddenly personal attacks are okay here if somebody writes something we don't like?

__________________
"I think David Platt just needs to pimp himself out." - Havana Brown
David Platt is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 08:22 AM   #123 (Print)
ZeoTiVo
fantastic four TiVos
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,704
Quote:
Originally posted by pgogborn
I do not mind if you want to take a swipe at something I have posted, but if you do, I think you should accurately represent the full flavor of what I post

I did not post "discussing 'vaporware' might be banned stock stock".

I posted "what I would really like to say about 'vaporware', 'product announcements', call it what you will, and TiVo Inc. would fall under the heading of stock talk".

As a starter, which I think would fall on the OK side of the boundary, I would draw a graph plotting TiVo stock price against product and other announcements.


OK so where is the FUD or vaporware in TiVo confirming public "speculation"
ZeoTiVo is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 09:13 AM   #124 (Print)
bigray327
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Space City, Texas
Posts: 1,690
Send a message via AIM to bigray327
I'm disappointed that after soliciting opinions from a large number of people, the author put out the same kind of misinformation that's been proliferated for years.

The alledged connection between DirecTV selling their stock and a possible non-TiVo PVR is a flat-out lie, IMHO. If DirecTV did such a thing without some kind of disclosure, I'm sure that would violate many SEC rules. It would also be perhaps the stupidest blunder in the history of the satellite television industry, as I stated to the author with apparently little effect.

Oh well, being disappointed about the media (and not TiVo) is nothing new.

__________________
- Ray
bigray327 is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 09:51 AM   #125 (Print)
ufo4sale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Bridgewater Nj 08807
Posts: 2,213
You would think after a while that people would get bored reading the same thing about TiVo over and over again. I know I am. I hoped that you were different but it's clear that your just all the rest of them.
ufo4sale is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 10:01 AM   #126 (Print)
interactiveTV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 828
Quote:
Originally posted by bigray327
I'm disappointed that after soliciting opinions from a large number of people, the author put out the same kind of misinformation that's been proliferated for years.

The alledged connection between DirecTV selling their stock and a possible non-TiVo PVR is a flat-out lie, IMHO.
It can't be a lie and it can't be in your opinion if it is speculation based on a future event. You can call it whatever you want but only the future will tell us if it is accurate. If DirecTV does offer a NDS PVR, then what? Your "lie" becomes fact. I don't know if it will happen -- though from all I know and have heard -- it is highly probably that Direct will offer a NDS based PVR set-top. Probably. Not certain. Am I right? I'll have to wait and see and so will you so don't go calling it a lie just yet.

Does the author have a source for his statement? I would hope so. I just can't call it a lie. I don't *know* if direct is "gearing up" or not. I suspect so but don't know.

Quote:
Originally posted by bigray327
If DirecTV did such a thing without some kind of disclosure, I'm sure that would violate many SEC rules.
Really? You are SURE. I'm not. I don't see any SEC violation whatsoever. Perhaps you can point me to the SEC regulation that DirecTV would be violating since you are sure of the violation.

Quote:
Originally posted by bigray327
It would also be perhaps the stupidest blunder in the history of the satellite television industry, as I stated to the author with apparently little effect.

Oh well, being disappointed about the media (and not TiVo) is nothing new.
What effect? You think YOUR OPINION of something that might or might not occur carries any weight? Especially when you throw out legal certainties with, what appears to me to be no comprehension of securities laws?

Disagree with the article, that's your right. Voice your opinion. That too is your right. Don't go calling future events "lies" and please, if you want to play SEC lawyer, back up your "certainty" with at least some substance or else the conversation is just a bunch of BS.

_ITV
interactiveTV is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 10:25 AM   #127 (Print)
jmoak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: florida
Posts: 1,872
Quote:
Originally posted by interactiveTV
...Does the author have a source for his statement? I would hope so. I just can't call it a lie. I don't *know* if direct is "gearing up" or not. I suspect so but don't know....

Does the author have a source for his statement? That is the $64,000 question.

Each time someone says "Directv Will Dump Tivo", I ask for a source.

So far, I have never received an answer other than references to other's speculation.

I can find definitive statements from the companies involved stating just the opposite and have given those links/sources in most cases.

Yet the media continues to present this speculation as fact.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but when that opinion is presented as fact in the face of verifiable information to the contrary, it does make one wonder.
jmoak is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 10:39 AM   #128 (Print)
interactiveTV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 828
Quote:
Originally posted by jmoak
Does the author have a source for his statement? That is the $64,000 question.

Each time someone says "Directv Will Dump Tivo", I ask for a source.

So far, I have never received an answer other than references to other's speculation.
Funny. I asked the exact same question. To quote myself, "Does the author have a source for his statement? I would hope so. I just can't call it a lie. I don't *know* if direct is "gearing up" or not. I suspect so but don't know."

I still think the hyperbole of calling it a lie coupled for the certainty of an SEC violation just makes a mess of everything. As do some of the personal attacks I've seen while skimming this thread.

Personally, I don't think Direct will DUMP Tivo (why is everything around here always binary????) but will augment Tivo with an NDS offering. It makes sense and is what I would do if in charge (I'm not )

_ITV
interactiveTV is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 10:47 AM   #129 (Print)
swsotd
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 34
No, it doesn't make sense. What makes sense is to offer TiVo Basic (a la the various DVD players/recorders) as your entry-level DirecTV DVR. Why confuse your customers and support personnel with multiple systems? And then the customer can perform the inevitable upgrade with the flip of a switch rather than a box replacement.
swsotd is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 11:26 AM   #130 (Print)
ZeoTiVo
fantastic four TiVos
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,704
Quote:
Originally posted by interactiveTV
Funny. I asked the exact same question. To quote myself, "Does the author have a source for his statement? I would hope so. I just can't call it a lie. I don't *know* if direct is "gearing up" or not. I suspect so but don't know."

I still think the hyperbole of calling it a lie coupled for the certainty of an SEC violation just makes a mess of everything. As do some of the personal attacks I've seen while skimming this thread.

Personally, I don't think Direct will DUMP Tivo (why is everything around here always binary????) but will augment Tivo with an NDS offering. It makes sense and is what I would do if in charge (I'm not )

_ITV


it is not that it is a lie, I asked if he had factual evidence to support the statement he PRESENTED AS FACT that DirectTV is introducing an NDS DVR. The author replied that as a journalist writing a column he did not have to verify something if it had a probability of being true. He glibly admitted that he had NO SUPPORTING SOURCE for his statement.
So basically he presented something as FACT in his article that he DID NOT KNOW AS FACT. That is why journalism in this country is so little respected.

so really you and I agree, interactiveTV on the premise of it but you should realize that the writer had no supporting source and is propagating speculation into certainty about a third party company. Something far worse than FUD or Vaporware by some company.

On the SEC issue, I geenrally know the rule is you can not sell off large blocks of Stock in a company prior to making some announcement that could adversely affect the price of that stock. That would be insider trading. This would unfortunately lead to DirectTV actually staying quiet about an NDS box for whatever grace period is needed. I do not know if the rules apply to internal business decisions like selling all stock while actively working out a deal on NDS boxes.

In relation to the article I point out that the journalist also committed factual ommissions by NOT stating that DirectTV sold several stock holdings in companies like XM radio as well. This would be significant information to any investor trying to evaluate TiVo stock. Its lack of inclusion in the article speaks volumes about the journalist, especially when added to the fact that he admits he stated something as fact he did not have a supporting source for.

Last edited by ZeoTiVo : 07-07-2004 at 11:40 AM.
ZeoTiVo is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 11:31 AM   #131 (Print)
jmoak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: florida
Posts: 1,872
interactiveTV,

When you speculate or give your opinion on a subject, you make sure to state it that way. When you state something as fact, you always include a source ... a verification of the facts you've presented. Even though our opinions may be different, I commend you on the general accuracy of your statements and your willingness to stand behind your facts.

Mr. Whitmore said in his article,
"(Directv) is gearing up to offer DVRs built by NDS Group"

...and ZeoTiVo asked him,
"where is the factual evidence that DirectTV is gearing up to offer NDS boxes?"

Did he reply with the factual, verifiable evidence?

No. His reply was a metaphor about a duck. He chose to make a snide comment instead of attempting to support what he presented as "fact".

When he asked this board for comments, verifiable links were supplied to him in stark contrast to his implied "fact". He chose to ignore them for reasons unknown to us.

If he would have simply stated it as his opinion or as a "generally accepted speculation", all of this could have been avoided. But, no. He chose to present it as fact.

It's a shame that a columnist for a very well known publication does not have the integrity that you show in your everyday posts.

btw,
I have no financial stake in Tivo.
My interest is truth in media.
This is just simply a point where two interests intersect, and a damn good example of the effect of the media upon public opinion and their ability to present information as "accepted fact" with little or no regard for the truth. ... and the unknowing public's propensity to perpetuate these lies without question.

"False opinions are like false money, struck first of all by guilty men and thereafter circulated by honest people who perpetuate the crime without knowing what they are doing."
- Joseph Marie de Maistre

Last edited by jmoak : 07-07-2004 at 03:26 PM.
jmoak is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 12:51 PM   #132 (Print)
interactiveTV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 828
Quote:
Originally posted by ZeoTiVo
On the SEC issue, I geenrally know the rule is you can not sell off large blocks of Stock in a company prior to making some announcement that could adversely affect the price of that stock. That would be insider trading. This would unfortunately lead to DirectTV actually staying quiet about an NDS box for whatever grace period is needed. I do not know if the rules apply to internal business decisions like selling all stock while actively working out a deal on NDS boxes.
Let's not confuse things here. First, as a matter of law, Insider Trading is not illegal. There are legal insider trades. Second, you are not alleging that any insider individual in DirecTV or NewsCorp bought or sold (or tipped someone else) Tivo stock but that the corporately owned shares were sold. Third, I can see no restriction or issue based on DirecTV's main comment on the Tivo stock sale:

"We have sold our equity stake in TiVo," DirecTV spokesman Robert Mercer said. But he added, "We are focused on increasing the penetration of DirecTV DVR with TiVo service into our customer base." http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/040609/tech_directv_tivo_2.html

On this statement, even if DirecTV currently plans to introduce an NDS based PVR, there is no wrong doing as long as this statement is true. DirecTV can easily make a case that it is focused on increasing the penetration of the DTivo even while introducing an NDS based PVR. Those are not mutually exclsuive. There is no quiet period, no restraint of normal business practices here, no illegality as far as I can tell.

By the way, the below link is generally good reading on insider trading:

http://www.sec.gov/news/speech/spee...998/spch221.htm

Quote:
Originally posted by ZeoTiVo
In relation to the article I point out that the journalist also committed factual ommissions by NOT stating that DirectTV sold several stock holdings in companies like XM radio as well. This would be significant information to any investor trying to evaluate TiVo stock. Its lack of inclusion in the article speaks volumes about the journalist, especially when added to the fact that he admits he stated something as fact he did not have a supporting source for.
It isn't the journalist's duty to include everything you consider material stock information. Any investor who wants significant (or material) information relating to Tivo stock and/or the DirecTV sale of such stock would be better served by contacting both companies' IR departments. I too think the article was sloppy. I think the presentation of a NDS based PVR should not be presented as it was -- though I am of the opinion it most likely will happen. I don't think the author lied. I don't think there are any SEC violations based on present information or probable, likely future events.

A sin of omission carries a price in some religions but journalism is not one of them Those who name call (not you) or make personal attacks do not serve to clear the air but further muddy it with baseless accusations and silly legal proclamations.

As to swsotd's thought of offering Tivo basic on Direct, I see little sense to offering a limited free service when the service is basically free already on Direct. The issue is hardware subsidies and service license costs; two things that I am relatively confident NDS could beat Tivo on. Do I think the offering would be as elegant and feature-rich? Nope, but Murdoch's goal of putting a PVR in every Direct household means every dollar saved on hardware subsidy or license costs will count. I also happen to believe that consumer choice is a good thing and as a Tivo customer, am all for it (though I have cable, not DBS). Why other Tivo customers resist it is beyond me. As stockholders, I could see their point but these aren't stock forums and I think that often times posters spout based on their financial stake in the company.

Enjoy your day

_ITV
interactiveTV is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 01:25 PM   #133 (Print)
swsotd
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 34
NDS cannot beat TiVo on hardware cost. Just read TiVo's "timewarping" patent for details on how they kept hardware cost down. As for software, DirecTV would negotiate a flat or once per-box fee for TiVo Basic, versus the average $1.44/subscriber/month fee they pay for TiVo service (which they would still offer for $4.99 or free with Platinum).
swsotd is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 01:59 PM   #134 (Print)
Rkkeller
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 664
Before either DirecTV or Tivo builds another DirecTivo unit they better do some SERIOUS tweaking to the hardware and/or software to fix the speed issues talked about in the DirecTivo forum.

I for one would be highly upset if the next generation DirecTivo gets released and the guide is still as klunky, slow drawing and almost unusable as the current models. Sure there are 2 modes but the one that works like a normal DirecTV receivers guide that we are all used it, is way way way to slow.

I also see no mention here about how pathetically slow the DirecTivo Season Pass Manager is when you have more than a few SP's and WL's and move some of them around. Mine can clunk away for 10-15 minutes easy if I change more than a few things. 10-15 minutes of sitting there in silence watching the "please wait" screen.

Forget new features, make the DirecTivo useable without you having to get pissed everytime you make a few changes.


Rich
Rkkeller is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 02:09 PM   #135 (Print)
GoodSpike
Registered User
 
GoodSpike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 13,091
I'll agree with you on the Season Pass problem, but the guide problem is solved by using the superior (in every way) Tivo style guide. I've never understood the DirecTV guide. Why would anyone want to know what's in in 90 minutes on channels that only show up because numerically they are close to the channel you are actually interested in? I'd much rather know what's in further in the future on a channel I actually watch (especially since with a Tivo you might actually record it).

__________________
Valet Park-It Yourself
GoodSpike is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 02:22 PM   #136 (Print)
bigray327
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Space City, Texas
Posts: 1,690
Send a message via AIM to bigray327
Now I remember why I avoid the Coffee House. ITV, I think it's blatently obvious that the author (admittedly) did about 10 minutes of research on this issue and then printed a statement that DTV is about to dump TiVo for NDS, knowing damn well that his readers would interpret it as fact. Hem and haw around the issue all the want, that was high school journalism, and if I was stupid enough to subscribe to Forbes, I'd immediately cancel my subscription.

Regarding the SEC issues, I'm far too lazy to go dig up rules and regulations just to satisfy you, but common sense would dictate that if somebody from DTV just happened to be sitting on the Board of Directors at TiVo and used what he heard behind closed TiVo doors to influence DirecTV's decision to sell its shares in TiVo, that would be wrong. If not, I don't really care; the fact remains that the author's statement was BS, as was his reply when called on it.

- "Overzealous early adopter"
bigray327 is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 03:03 PM   #137 (Print)
interactiveTV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 828
Quote:
Originally posted by bigray327
Now I remember why I avoid the Coffee House. ITV, I think it's blatently obvious that the author (admittedly) did about 10 minutes of research on this issue and then printed a statement that DTV is about to dump TiVo for NDS, knowing damn well that his readers would interpret it as fact. Hem and haw around the issue all the want, that was high school journalism, and if I was stupid enough to subscribe to Forbes, I'd immediately cancel my subscription.
Who is hemming and hawing besides you? I said he didn't lie. I did say I hoped he had something to back it up otherwise it was misleading but neither you nor I know enough to say he lied.

High school writing would tell you the difference between misleading and actual lying. As for what is "blatently obvious" or not is also a matter of opinion. Let's try and keep opinion and fact seperate ourselves, shall we? You seem to want to skewer someone for it yet make the same error yourself. I love irony. Makes me smile.

Quote:
Originally posted by bigray327
Regarding the SEC issues, I'm far too lazy to go dig up rules and regulations just to satisfy you, but common sense would dictate that if somebody from DTV just happened to be sitting on the Board of Directors at TiVo and used what he heard behind closed TiVo doors to influence DirecTV's decision to sell its shares in TiVo, that would be wrong.
Wow. You didn't say that before but hey, hew and haw and have your fun. We'll go with this new version of events because I love a good political walk-back as much as the next guy and you really did a beaut here.

Now it's "wrong". So is poverty and so many years of the New York Knicks but that doesn't make it illegal.

Common sense and the law are totally different animals. You were "sure" any connection between selling stock and introducing a non-Tivo PVR would be an SEC violation. I don't think it would be as long as Direct's statement made (I quoted it in my last post) was accurate and truthful to the best of their knowledge at that time. Your scenario, while cute, has little bearing on your original post or any real events that have transpired.

BTW: In general, if you're too lazy to back up your CERTANTIES, how are you so certain? And, I would venture a guess that you looking up rules and regulations wouldn't really give you much of an answer when it comes to securities law. Good duck though. Laziness is always the best defense of a point.

Quote:
Originally posted by bigray327
"Overzealous early adopter"
Ain't that the truth. The thing is that calling people liars and making legal pronouncements just don't do very much in making your opinion heard. It only creates a sense of zealousness that drowns out any chance of higher discourse around here.

I think the article was pretty poorly done. I think there were some misleading parts and some opinions I agreed with and others I don't. About par for any deadline journalism on just about any topic -- ever see the NYTimes' corrections page every day? I don't see any of that as justification to call someone a liar without substantive backup or for any other personal attacks. Point out errors, disagree and move on. Kind of like I'm now doing with you. Moving on...

_ITV
interactiveTV is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-07-2004, 03:25 PM   #138 (Print)
samo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Littleton, CO, US
Posts: 733
Quote:
I think it's blatently obvious that the author (admittedly) did about 10 minutes of research on this issue and then printed a statement that DTV is about to dump TiVo for NDS, knowing damn well that his readers would interpret it as fact. Hem and haw around the issue all the want, that was high school journalism, and if I was stupid enough to subscribe to Forbes, I'd immediately cancel my subscription.

Good for Forbes! Imagine if you were stupid and a Forbes subscriber and canceled the subscription because of this article! That would send such a shock-wave that Forbes most likely would go under.
Or maybe Forbes readers are not stupid and don't take everything printed as the fact? Job of the journalist (in part) is to connect the dots and to present his analysis before official announcement is made. So lets look at facts.
1. TiVo contract with DTV runs out in 2007.
2. NDS announced that they will make a bid to DTV for PVR contract.
3. DTV sold it's stake in TiVo and removed it's representative from TiVo board of directors.
4. Ruppert owns both DTV and NDS.
5. DTV announced that they will no longer have multiple vendors for IRDs (the will handle all the sales themselves just like Dish does).
6. After DTV announced sale of TiVo holdings, TiVo went on a panic damage control spree by announcing free HMO and discount on second TiVo subscription with implication that this would raise SA TiVo sales.
7. TiVo has not made a dime yet and with increased competition is a very risky sole source provider. DTV needs to have an alternative source for DVRs should TiVo go under.
Now, connect the dots and present your best guess. My guess is that DTV will introduce NDS PVR this year and will start phasing out TiVos. They will continue to support existing boxes just like they do UTV, but will not subsidize any TiVo hardware.
samo is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-08-2004, 08:35 AM   #139 (Print)
ZeoTiVo
fantastic four TiVos
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,704
Quote:
Originally posted by samo

6. After DTV announced sale of TiVo holdings, TiVo went on a panic damage control spree by announcing free HMO and discount on second TiVo subscription with implication that this would raise SA TiVo sales.



umm they had the free trial of HMO running way before DirectTV sold its stock. TiVoOpsMgr admitted in this forum they knew HMO was going into standard package many months before the anouncement.

So HMO was not the damage control - it was the confirmation of public "speculation" that TiVo was looking in internet content download adn would have something early next year though they were not ready with any real timetables yet anouncement that was their damage control. The DirectTV media bandwagon forced them into making some anouncement about their future strategies that did not rely on DirectTV or otehr cable contract.


other than that the dots are correct but connecting them does not necessarily draw a duck
ZeoTiVo is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-08-2004, 08:45 AM   #140 (Print)
GoodSpike
Registered User
 
GoodSpike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 13,091
I have a Series 1 DTivo, so I don't know a lot about HMO. But couldn't Tivo set it up so that the units would share guide data? If that's the case, I could see them going to a pricing scheme where there was no additional charge for additional SA Tivos that are connected, just as there's no additional charge for DTivos now.

__________________
Valet Park-It Yourself
GoodSpike is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-08-2004, 10:02 AM   #141 (Print)
jb510
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally posted by swhitmore
The Forbes.com column is now posted on the site's home page. The link below will take you directly to the column.

http://www.forbes.com/columnists/20...07whitmore.html

Thanks again to everyone. Starting tonight there will be some supplemental content on my own site at http://www.mediasurvey.com


Sam


Sam,

having just read your article, you're right about TiVo's effect as a market "disruptor", but that doesn't tell us anything about the companies future which is what you should have been focused on.

Yes, DierctTV divested thier TiVo shares and could offer the NDS based DVR box in the future, but unless they're replacing the 1 million TiVo boxes DirecTV currently has in the market place TiVo isn't going to disappear overnight because a new DVR is made available. Recall that DirecTV customers OWN their equipment, it's not leased like the vast majority of cable operators equipment so it isn't so easily replaced.

Which brings me to my point. To discuss TiVo's future you MUST discuss TiVo's strategy for competing in the cable market. That requires that you talk about OpenCable and how that may change the cable market. Then you can talk about TiVo's future really relying on developing an OpenCable set-top box that they can retail independently of cable operators. Until they do cable operators will have a substainal advantage by having a DVR integrated into their set top boxes that records directly from multiple tuners similar to the way the DirecTiVo boxes work.

Given the choice consumers have already shown they prefer TiVo, what's critical to TiVo's future is making sure that choice is available in all markets with the same features.
jb510 is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-08-2004, 10:11 AM   #142 (Print)
ThreeSoFar
FourNow...WaitFive
 
ThreeSoFar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 3,764
Quote:
Originally posted by jb510
Sam,
Wow, JB. Nice thoughtful post.

But I think you're giving this guy way too much credit. He's not that thoughtful or intelligent, I think, based on reading his work.

__________________
Stupid tiny sig limi
ThreeSoFar is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-08-2004, 11:09 AM   #143 (Print)
interactiveTV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 828
Quote:
Originally posted by jb510
To discuss TiVo's future you MUST discuss TiVo's strategy for competing in the cable market. That requires that you talk about OpenCable and how that may change the cable market. Then you can talk about TiVo's future really relying on developing an OpenCable set-top box that they can retail independently of cable operators. Until they do cable operators will have a substainal advantage by having a DVR integrated into their set top boxes that records directly from multiple tuners similar to the way the DirecTiVo boxes work.
Lots of folks, including me, would love to discuss Tivo's strategy for the cable market. Unfortunately, Tivo has been pretty damn mum on the subject. Actual cable deals have been "discussed" for eons and every conference call seems to be the same old on that. In terms of Cable Card, it's here. Sony has made announcements (without Tivo service) and others will follow. Other than some vague comments and some responses on the actual specs, Tivo hasn't actually outlined its strategy so there isn't much to discuss.

Sure, you, me, and a few others can sit here and pontificate on what that strategy should be but there's not much from Tivo that gives us much.

Tivo has spent R&D and marketing dollars (conference) on TivoToGo, a feature that seems pretty unimportant compared to a Cable Card product, reference platform, or partner.

You're 100% right. An informed discussion of Tivo's possible future must include Cable Card. Another few months of radio silence and they will miss the holiday season, early adopter crowd, those willing to shell out $1,000 for a cable HD PVR. That Sony HD Cable Card looks good to me right now. Pity.

_ITV
interactiveTV is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-08-2004, 02:40 PM   #144 (Print)
kc51295
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 97
samo-

Honestly, those are all good points- but I must ask- why would Direct tv KILL a product for them that reduces churn from 1.5% to 0.5% , saving them MILLIONS of $$$- and change to a product that may not be any cheaper for them and has no guarantee to match those churn rates ? answer me that and I will begin to believe the dots are connected-
the simple point is I have never seen another DVR partnership reduce churn to that level- certainly not DISH or comcast- so show me numbers like that if you can
thanks
kc51295 is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-08-2004, 03:15 PM   #145 (Print)
samo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Littleton, CO, US
Posts: 733
Quote:
Honestly, those are all good points- but I must ask- why would Direct tv KILL a product for them that reduces churn from 1.5% to 0.5% , saving them MILLIONS of $$$- and change to a product that may not be any cheaper for them and has no guarantee to match those churn rates ? answer me that and I will begin to believe the dots are connected

From SkyRetailer:
"In another study on the Digeo service, conducted by SmithGeiger, 28 percent of analog cable and 20 percent of satellite subscribers said they would convert to digital cable if advanced features such as Digeo's Moxi service were made available to them. And, 63 percent of digital cable customers indicated they would be more likely to keep digital cable with a Moxi-like service. "
63% of 1.5% is 1%, so Moxi would reduce a churn for DTV just the same. Dish Network has a churn of 1.7% with churn for DishPVR users under 0.5%. It is not TiVo, it is a DVR regardless of brand that makes churn rates go down. As for cost of the hardware, since components in both NDS and DTiVo units are essentialy the same there are no reasons to believe that one unit could be substantially cheaper than another. The only advantage NDS has is that they are in-house company and can be prevented from going under.
samo is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-08-2004, 04:35 PM   #146 (Print)
GoodSpike
Registered User
 
GoodSpike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 13,091
Quote:
Originally posted by samo
From SkyRetailer:
"In another study on the Digeo service, conducted by SmithGeiger, 28 percent of analog cable and 20 percent of satellite subscribers said they would convert to digital cable if advanced features such as Digeo's Moxi service were made available to them. And, 63 percent of digital cable customers indicated they would be more likely to keep digital cable with a Moxi-like service. "
63% of 1.5% is 1%, so Moxi would reduce a churn for DTV just the same.


You're comparing survey results of people who haven't used a product (for a product that I think might not even be out yet) against actual results of a product.

I suspect Dish probably had a similar survey before they launched their POS product.

__________________
Valet Park-It Yourself
GoodSpike is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-08-2004, 09:29 PM   #147 (Print)
kc51295
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 97
thanks good spike ! and I have NEVER seen churn for DISH under 0.5%- period ! that one you will have to show me
kc51295 is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-08-2004, 11:57 PM   #148 (Print)
samo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Littleton, CO, US
Posts: 733
Quote:
I have NEVER seen churn for DISH under 0.5%- period

Did you look into Dish SEC filings? Last reported overall churn rate for Dish was 1.7% with churn for DishPVR users under 0.5%. Explanation to that and reduced churn for DTV with TiVo is very simple. Both Dish and DTV offer free equipment and installation for new users. That makes it easy for people to walk away after contract expires. On other hand DVR users have to pay for hardware and are much less likely to forfeit their investment. For example, I have 4 DishPVRs that cost me about $1400 to get. Even if DTiVo was gold-plated, it would be hard for me to justify switching to DTV (besides the fact that DTV doesn't have programming I need). Of course convenience of DVR is also a factor, but it isn't specific to TiVo - all DVRs, even free DVRs from cable companies, tend to reduce churn by at least 40-50% (as reported by Charter and TW). Hardware investment by itself is a very well known factor that keeps people hooked not only in DVR industry, but for instrumentation, tools, ink-jets, cameras just to name a few things that come to mind.
samo is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-09-2004, 07:44 AM   #149 (Print)
GoodSpike
Registered User
 
GoodSpike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 13,091
Quote:
Originally posted by kc51295
thanks good spike ! and I have NEVER seen churn for DISH under 0.5%- period ! that one you will have to show me


I was saying that before they released their DVR they probably had projections that their DVR would reduce churn to that level. It was just a comment to suggest projections don't really mean much.

__________________
Valet Park-It Yourself
GoodSpike is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 07-09-2004, 11:05 AM   #150 (Print)
ashu
The reTurbanator!
 
ashu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 6,168
Send a message via AIM to ashu Send a message via Yahoo to ashu
Quote:
Originally posted by samo
Even if DTiVo was gold-plated, it would be hard for me to justify switching to DTV


[OT] Ahhh - but didn't you know that gold-plating improves signal quality? Heck - Monster has me convinced and I shell out thrice the market-value for all their cables.

__________________
Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo! So little time! So much to know!
Ultimate Wireless Network
ashu is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
 
Forum Jump
Thread Tools

Go Back  TiVo Community Archive2 > Main TiVo Forums > TiVo Coffee House - TiVo Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:18 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(C)opyright - All Rights Reserved. No information may be posted elsewhere without written permission.
TiVoŽ is a registered trademark of TiVo Inc. This site is not affiliated with TiVo Inc.


Spider History Index