1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Lifetime is Far Too Expensive on the Mini

Discussion in 'TiVo Mini' started by andrews777, Aug 30, 2013.

  1. TC25D

    TC25D New Member

    202
    0
    Aug 21, 2013
    No, I'm not proving your point. But if that makes you feel better, so be it. To be clear, I said primary purpose(s) and audiences for each device type. Saying TiVo's primary audience are people looking to improve their cable company DVR experience does not preclude TiVo from offering access to similar services as Roku, et. al., particularly since Roku and the others cannot offer DVR and cable company access. The OTA tuner was included for a simple reason, it was easy to do.
     
  2. aristoBrat

    aristoBrat Active Member

    1,062
    0
    Dec 30, 2002
    Va Beach, VA
    IMO, cord cutters are looking for the least expensive solution, so the fact that they're going out and dropping $600+ for an OTA TiVo/Lifetime Service seems to prove the point that these $99 Roku and Apple TV boxes are leaving a void that these people want filled.

    I think its as TC25D said ... TiVo's main purposes are (1) DVR and (2) Live broadcasts.

    As creative and determined as some of the cord cutters have shown to be, if there was a way to get a $99 streaming box to fill in for DVR and Live Broadcasts, I don't think there'd be much demand at all for an OTA TiVo.
     
  3. TC25D

    TC25D New Member

    202
    0
    Aug 21, 2013
    One correction - the OTA-capable TiVo is only $200.
     
  4. aristoBrat

    aristoBrat Active Member

    1,062
    0
    Dec 30, 2002
    Va Beach, VA
    Sorry, I was meaning hardware + Lifetime Service.
     
  5. TC25D

    TC25D New Member

    202
    0
    Aug 21, 2013
    OK. :)
     
  6. b_scott

    b_scott TiVo Fan

    1,535
    0
    Nov 27, 2006
    chicago, il
    they're going the opposite way. They're taking out OTA tuners from their newer higher models. Actually, not "taking out" so much as "these 6 tuner models won't do OTA"
     
  7. Scooby Doo

    Scooby Doo New Member

    96
    0
    Dec 18, 2002
    I suspect that has more to do with wanting to have MOCA in those boxes; there are issues supporting MOCA and OTA in the same box. There are quite a few people, myself included, who are sort of "potential future cord cutters" and would have preferred the Plus and the Pro to support OTA.
     
  8. Scooby Doo

    Scooby Doo New Member

    96
    0
    Dec 18, 2002
    I certainly agree cord cutters are looking for the least expensive way to get the content they want. And at the moment they will pay a premium for a Tivo because of the content available on it. But go look at what Roku is doing with live content, with on demand, even with broadcast channels via Aereo in a growing number of markets. The content gap is shrinking; it will probably always be there, but it's shrinking.
     
  9. Dan203

    Dan203 Super Moderator Staff Member TCF Club

    37,443
    164
    Apr 17, 2000
    Nevada
    Just because TiVo adds features that appeal to cord cutters doesn't mean they are the primary target of the device. The argument here is that TiVo is too expensive when compared to the "competition" (i.e. Roku & AppleTV) we're simply rebutting that TiVo does not actually view those devices as competition and as such their pricing and business models have no effect on TiVo's pricing and business model. TiVo views their competition as cable DVRs. They add these OTT apps specifically to compete with their lack of access to VOD. Some people may see the lack of access to VOD as no big deal if they have access to enough OTT apps which provide the same content.
     
  10. jmpage2

    jmpage2 New Member

    1,951
    0
    Jan 20, 2004
    We aren't TiVo executives so none of us knows who they consider competition. If they are smart they do view market disrupters like Roku and ATV as competition even if its on their periphery.

    The company I work for makes telephone and network switching equipment and applications. Microsoft was viewed as an upcoming competitor years before they acquired Skype or had LINC communicator to integrate with phone switches.

    By way of comparison, MSFT did not take market disruptor Apple seriously as competition in the smartphone space with introduction of the iPhone, with their CEO notoriously mocking the idea of people spending $600 on a "cell phone".... and we know how that one turned out.
     
  11. Loach

    Loach New Member

    376
    0
    Jan 11, 2013
    Omaha, NE
    Actually we do know, because they write about it in the Business section of their annual report on Form 10-K. And you are right -they consider Roku, et al. as competition on their periphery. See the following excerpt from their most recent 10-K:

    Link to the business section of the 10-K.
     
  12. jmpage2

    jmpage2 New Member

    1,951
    0
    Jan 20, 2004
    Good to know. I think it proves the point though that they do view those products as competition... just not "primary" competition.
     
  13. b_scott

    b_scott TiVo Fan

    1,535
    0
    Nov 27, 2006
    chicago, il
    The iPhone is a phone. Does everything a windows phone would do. It's a direct competitor regardless of price. And it already had the mp3 market share tied up, so they were already big in the game.

    Plus phones get subsidized.
     
  14. jmpage2

    jmpage2 New Member

    1,951
    0
    Jan 20, 2004
    It doesn't matter whether the device IS a direct competitor, it matters whether or not the incumbent company (in our example MSFT, but also TiVo in this case) views the competitor product as viable competition.

    In the case of MSFT they completely under-estimated the effect of the iPhone and MSFTs dismal position in the mobile space today underscores that fact.
     
  15. Loach

    Loach New Member

    376
    0
    Jan 11, 2013
    Omaha, NE
    Agreed.
     

Share This Page