Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (
More info?)
"Scooby" <mmscooby1@removeme.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:511d0$426902f9$a22770bd$23993@ALLTEL.NET...
>SNIP
> Yes, and if people want to keep paying for that, great. However, I
> believe
> (and there certainly has been enough noise about it) that a non-sub dvr
> that
> works like a vcr is in demand. They've got the technology - why not offer
> it? Count up the vcr's that they could replace and that people would buy
> if
> there was not a high monthly sub with it. Tivo only has one flavor - full
> service. Most products will offer levels of options for the simple reason
> that not everyone wants to pay for all the options. Think about auto
> dealers. How successful do you think a dealer would be if the only cars
> he
> offered were fully loaded? Would he sell some? Absolutely. But, most
> people don't want to pay for options they won't use. Even luxury car
> makers
> offer different flavors and options.
>
Actually if you look at what the Japanese car makers have done, they have
reduced the number of options rather than increase them. Most Japanese cars
have 1-3 option packages ulike US manufacturers where options are priced
ala-carte. People want simplicity not complexity. Tivo has 2 options,
monthly or lifetime service. The connection I don't think you are making is
Tivo=Service (not Tivo=hardware). There are lots of DVRs that don't require
service that will do exactly what you want. So it would seem to me that you
do have options, get Tivo service or get a DVR that doesn't require service.
SNIP
> Anyway, back to the nature of this thread.... My whole stance can be
> summarized to this. Tivo has a great product, but shuts a lot of people
> out
> based on the high subscription fee (again, I still fail to see the
> justification for this high of a fee). There are options out there for a
> lot more revenue. Since Tivo is losing (is that better?) so much money,
> it
> is certainly worth exploring. That's all. This whole argument started
> because one person asked if a non-sub option was available and he got a
> really lame, in your face 'If you want a vcr, get a vcr' response.
> Jeepers,
> what is the harm in asking?
>
No harm in asking and I agree that the 'get a VCR' response was moronic. I
don't get your logic that a company that is losing money should lower its
prices on its products. If they can't make money with the existing price I
think the conventional wisdom would be to price the product to make a profit
or reduce the operating costs so that there is margin in the existing
product pricing model. Granted there is some elasticity in the market and
perhaps a lower price would garner Tivo some additional subscribers but
without an in-depth analysis it's hard to say what effect a lower
subscription rate would do to increase subscribers.
TC
/www.tivo.com/2.1.4.asp
Facebook
Twitter