Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'TiVo Series 1 - UK' started by Jo.Cassady, Feb 21, 2011.
10/10, very good post, A++++
Suppose it costs TiVo £x to keep the EPG service going (for S1 people)
Their loss of income would be > £x
Given that the infrastructure already exists, the cost of £x is relatively minute.
Then, think of all the geeks who won't think twice about creating/downloading TiVo software, sticking two fingers up to their patents and Copyrights. Right now, I might even be inclined to donate £100 to people working on "non-official" TiVo software/hardware.
Yup, we're a tiny but vocal minority. Perhaps our influence will be negligible, but i'll damn well try. On principle.
If their renewal for tribune UK data is in June (TiVo pays tribune for the raw guide data) - that alone might be £50k ... hardly "minute".
I really wish you guys would stop speculating about the costs.
No one knows whether the service was profitable or not. There is no way to know either way, regardless of what any of us might think.
Stop second guessing the intentions of Tivo. They have the right to stop the service per the Ts&Cs. They're exercising this right. End of.
Yes indeed they had the right to stop the service and they did.
We also have the right to speculate and talk as much bovine excrement as we want.
My final say on the matter, look how few people have signed the petition:
This includes people such as myself and Carl etc having signed. People who have 'made peace' with the decision so to speak.
There is no significant outrage outside of this forum and there is no where near a big enough group of people bothered for any company to care.
I think what the agreement was when we took out the £200 lifetime seems to have drifted in people's minds over the many intervening years.
It was never sold as "the service will continue for the lifetime of your box". It was sold very clearly when you called up - "Do you want to pay £10 month, or £199 up front and never pay any more for the lifetime of your box?". It's a lifetime guaranteed of no more payments, not of indefinite service. The latter doesn't pass the simple common sense test - a promise to still provide the service in 10, 20, 30 years?
You can look back in the archive here, specially when people were buying boxes after TiVo's withdrawal, and see many posts along the lines of "Should I buy a lifetime sub as I'm not sure TiVo will still be providing the service in 20 months". No-one ever replied "Yes, because lifetimers are guaranteed a service forever". Or even "yes, because you can sue TiVo when they close the service".
But it seems to have warped in people's minds into "they promised forever" which just ain't so. The word "lifetime" is simply the counterpoint to "pay monthly". Taking a lifetime enabled us to make a saving over paying £10 a month. No more.
Still avoiding responding to the inconvenient truth I mentioned in my previous post, Jo?
Why should TiVo care about that? You're talking about a tiny number of people who would be interested in keeping UK S1 boxes alive, and that number is only going to decline further over time.
Very good point. I remember those threads!
Me too! I decided that TiVo wasn't going to be round for very long so opted to pay £10 a month. Lots of other TiVo owners thought that too, whereas those who opted to pay the lifetime sub used arguments like 'well if the service continues for more than 20 months you'll be laughing'. Those who took out the lifetime sub knew full well they were taking a risk.
IMHO lifetimers have been very well treated indeed, I think TiVo has behaved honourably in providing the service for so long after the company withdrew from the UK. What other company has done anything like this?
Surely those who took out the lifetime sub didn't expect a TiVo service until the day they died? How many of them actually don't have the actual product they bought, anyhow? I reckon most boxes have been modified - the true lifetime of the S1 box should be up to the point where the owner felt if had outlived its day in its current form and upgraded the hard drive . . . . it then became a different beast.
*Thinking*, however, does.
Not to mention the time taken to do the research to get your facts right. Something else sorely lacking in certain people's posts
You better get it out and start using it - it'll be useless soon.
Again that in itself would be an unfair term under the act. You can quote State of California in dealings between companies but try it with consumers and it gives a disproportional benefit which a court would strike out.
An excellent question
I've had good value but not fair value.
I'll try an analogy.
If I bet £100 on a 20 to 1 bet, win and the bookie says "ah I think I keep back £500 of the £2,000 payout because I'm a bit short of cash". I would still have a good payout but not a fair one.
We bet our £200 + PVR purchase price on a TiVo company that could have folded within weeks. It didn't. I want my fair results. If I don't get them or a reasonable offer I will continue to think they've behaved scandalously.
So do you think TAMs have had fair value from their £1,200 ?
Its arguable. They must have thought it was fair value to pay that way. I never thought the TAM deal was good value.
Indeed. It took EIGHT YEARS. I'd say that was very "fair"; as would others.
There really is no pleasing some people. You in effect paid less than £2 a month rather than £10, and you feel you've been somehow robbed. Extraordinary.
At what point would it have been "fair"? £1? 50p? 5p?
It would have been fair when either the box owned expired or an updated service was available.
That's a very hard line perspective.