Why isn't TiVo offering a streaming package/cloud DVR?

Discussion in 'TiVo Coffee House - TiVo Discussion' started by TitanTiger, Jul 30, 2019.

  1. Jul 31, 2019 #61 of 119
    Charles R

    Charles R Active Member

    548
    227
    Nov 9, 2000
    USA
    Then why haven't they already gone in that direction? I guess everyone who runs the company knows less than someone with zero inside knowledge and experience.

    I wasn't addressing this industry. Rather how all businesses are run.

    Again, what proof do you have that this would make the company stronger going forward? Zero. Until you can present some it seems "silly" to sell it as a solution... as it's not based on anything factual. I dare say if you had anything factual they would have already done such. And I'll withdraw until some proof has been posted as until then there is nothing to discuss. :)
     
  2. Jul 31, 2019 #62 of 119
    ajwees41

    ajwees41 Well-Known Member

    2,950
    137
    May 7, 2006
    Omaha,NE
    email the CEO then if you want to now no customers would know
     
  3. Jul 31, 2019 #63 of 119
    TitanTiger

    TitanTiger Member

    51
    5
    May 5, 2009
    Why does any company miss out on opportunities they shouldn't? Why didn't Sony, who was synonymous with portable music with the Walkman, allow a company like Apple to swoop in and completely steal the digital music player market out from under them? Why did Blackberry get caught so flatfooted as the iPhone (and Android) stole the smartphone market they dominated? Companies make dumb decisions sometimes.

    Neither of us can "prove" anything. But what we can do is look at the industry and where it's going:

    - TiVo is currently tethered to cable/satellite providers and cable/satellite companies are hemorrhaging subscribers. This is an incontrovertible fact.

    - People who used to sign up for cable packages aren't simply ditching TV watching, they are leaving for various streaming services whether it be Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, PS Vue, Sling, YouTube TV or some combination thereof. This is also an incontrovertible fact.

    If they want to remain relevant or be successful in the TV/DVR realm, it's clear that sticking with the old guard cable/sat providers isn't going to do that. So what are the options?

    - Somehow get one or more of these streaming services to adopt their software/UI. That ship has basically sailed. It's highly unlikely that any of them would ditch their current investments in their UI to take on someone else's and pay licensing for it.

    - Get in the game themselves. I think it would be best to do a combination of bundles of existing cable networks/local channels and perhaps some original programming. Expose more people to the TiVo interface and ease of use. Apply their expert knowledge of DVR tech to a cloud based DVR but also, perhaps push a software update to recent gen boxes to be able to handle the new TiVo streaming service as well.

    - Die slowly on the vine.

    Which option would you choose? And if it's none of the above, what would you propose given what we know?
     
  4. Jul 31, 2019 #64 of 119
    TitanTiger

    TitanTiger Member

    51
    5
    May 5, 2009
    I have emailed the company to encourage them to go this direction.
     
  5. Jul 31, 2019 #65 of 119
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    3,426
    1,561
    May 2, 2015
    As I've said before, IF YOU DON'T OWN CONTENT, sit down. You do NOT belong in the brave new world of TV. If TiVo tried to get into that game, they'd be about as successful as Vidgo. (Never heard of Vidgo, which took like 3 years to get off the launch pad? That's my point.)

    FuboTV and Philo aren't pulling it off. FuboTV is tiny and will likely be dead in a year or two. Philo is a joint venture of the smaller cable network owners: Discovery, Viacom, AMC Networks and A+E Networks. Discovery is launching their own direct-to-consumer SVOD (in partnership with the BBC) early next year. Viacom is about to be swallowed up by CBS (with their content probably going into CBS All Access). I suspect CBS may also buy AMC and/or A+E too. (Actually A+E Networks is 50% owned by Disney and 50% by Hearst, so perhaps Disney will just buy out the other half and incorporate them into Hulu.) At some point, the media powers will decide that little ol' Philo doesn't serve their interests any more.
     
    trip1eX and mschnebly like this.
  6. Jul 31, 2019 #66 of 119
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    3,426
    1,561
    May 2, 2015
    What you're describing is the phenomenon whereby leaders of the old regime fail to understand that the ground is shifting away underneath their feet. They see some upstart competitor but deny that their new way of doing things is really a threat, because they're wedded to the old regime that they rule. By the time that they wise up and try to compete with some sad copy of the upstart's product, it's too late. Nobody wants your lame version of the iPod and iTunes, Sony. We already have the real deal from Apple.
     
  7. Jul 31, 2019 #67 of 119
    Joe3

    Joe3 Active Member

    695
    187
    Dec 12, 2006
    Boston MA
    This thread asks a double binded question. You can't answer a double binded question.

    Why is TiVo not being something it's not?

    Huh? Huh? :mad:
     
  8. Jul 31, 2019 #68 of 119
    ej42137

    ej42137 Well-Known Member

    3,591
    494
    Feb 15, 2014
    Los Angeles

    1) That is not a double bind question. It is a counterfactual question, which is certainly not inherently unanswerable.

    2) One can answer a double bind question if allowed a complete answer. For example: "When did you stop beating your wife, answer yes or no? Answer: I have never beaten my wife; and you're an idiot."
     
  9. Jul 31, 2019 #69 of 119
    Joe3

    Joe3 Active Member

    695
    187
    Dec 12, 2006
    Boston MA
    I can't believe I am defending this.

    No, the question is not contrary to a fact, which would make it a statement instead of a question.

    It's a double bind question

    : a psychological predicament in which a person receives from a single source conflicting messages that allow no appropriate response to be made.
     
  10. Jul 31, 2019 #70 of 119
    ej42137

    ej42137 Well-Known Member

    3,591
    494
    Feb 15, 2014
    Los Angeles
    "Why is TiVo not being something it's not?" is not a double bind question. The meaning of the question is exactly the same as "Why is TiVo not doing something?", the "it's not" part is redundant. It is a question about something that is not in fact the case, a counter-factual. Your assertion that the question is a logical contradiction is incorrect.

    If you think the question is a double bind, please identify the contradicting elements.
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2019
  11. Aug 1, 2019 #71 of 119
    TitanTiger

    TitanTiger Member

    51
    5
    May 5, 2009
    YouTube TV doesn't own content. Yes, they've put a few of their own shows out there. Anyone can fund a few shows. That's not the draw to YouTube TV. It's the skinny bundle with local channels. TiVo can do the same.
     
  12. Aug 1, 2019 #72 of 119
    EWiser

    EWiser Active Member

    329
    96
    Oct 2, 2008
    YouTube is owned by google.
     
  13. Aug 1, 2019 #73 of 119
    jcthorne

    jcthorne Well-Known Member

    3,107
    188
    Jan 28, 2002
    Houston
    No, Tivo is not going to be a streaming provider. BUT

    Tivo needs to do for streaming what they once did for linear TV. They need to be a content aggregator. IE put all your content from ALL your sources in one place, organized and updated.
     
    sd2528, AlvisoShowcase and Joe3 like this.
  14. Aug 1, 2019 #74 of 119
    Charles R

    Charles R Active Member

    548
    227
    Nov 9, 2000
    USA
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2019
  15. Aug 1, 2019 #75 of 119
    EWiser

    EWiser Active Member

    329
    96
    Oct 2, 2008
    It would suggest that TiVo have the different streaming apps on their boxes and allow their users to subscribe to them. Don’t think it TiVo should get into the streaming business. But offer the different apps on the device. Just as they have prime and YouTube and Netflix now on their devices.
     
  16. Aug 1, 2019 #76 of 119
    trip1eX

    trip1eX Well-Known Member

    3,299
    245
    Apr 2, 2005
    Google now has the most net cash of any corporation. Something like $117 billion net cash.

    Also YTTV has synergies with Google's other businesses. Google's goal has always been to keep people online because the more time people spend online the more they use Search etc and the more money Google makes. YTTV fits that goal.


    So in theory Google could run YTTV at a loss if they ultimately make money off of it through Search and their other businesses. It could be seen as just another operating expense for Search. :)
     
  17. Aug 1, 2019 #77 of 119
    TitanTiger

    TitanTiger Member

    51
    5
    May 5, 2009
    That would be great. I just don't think they can get the existing streaming companies to adopt/support it. They don't have the same level of patents in this realm that they have in the DVR realm either so it would be harder to keep them from adopting ideas and putting it into their own interfaces I would think.
     
  18. Aug 1, 2019 #78 of 119
    ajwees41

    ajwees41 Well-Known Member

    2,950
    137
    May 7, 2006
    Omaha,NE
    why should they they are the dvr business not content provider business
     
    Joe3 likes this.
  19. Aug 1, 2019 #79 of 119
    TitanTiger

    TitanTiger Member

    51
    5
    May 5, 2009
    If you'd been following the conversation so far, you'd see I addressed this: the DVR business is not a recipe for success going forward. It's a dying business. It may always retain some small niche, but as cable/satellite providers continue to hemorrhage subscribers, losing them to streaming services and such, buying/renting a hardware box to record shows is going to be less and less a thing.

    So my contention/suggestion to TiVo if they want to take what makes them great (which is the software and UI functionality, not the hunk of metal and silicon sitting in your entertainment center) into the future, they need to adapt to where the TV watching market is headed.
     
  20. Aug 1, 2019 #80 of 119
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    3,426
    1,561
    May 2, 2015
    YouTube TV is, in fact, the one major exception to the rule about owning content. (OK, Google actually has made several original series, such as Cobra Kai, under the "YouTube Premium" banner, and those are included for free on YouTube TV, but that's beside the point.)

    What YouTube TV has going for it is that it's owned by Google, who has SCADS of money plus a HUGE foothold in the world of digital advertising. So they can afford to lose money on YouTube TV for now, while they scale it up and gain enough subscribers to make it profitable through the use of the same user-targeted digital advertising platform that works so well for them on free YouTube.

    TiVo, however, does not have scads of money that they can burn through, nor do they have one of the world's largest (the largest?) digital advertising platform enriched with loads of addressable data on billions of individuals.
     

Share This Page