Tivo's poor marketing?

« Apex Digital and bargain culture | Main | Intel to Make DVR PC »

Tivo's poor marketing?

In an effort to understand why Tivo has not taken off in the mainstream even though Tivo and it's service is rabidly popular among current customers, Erik Thauvin believes it is poor marketing. He plays devil's advocate:

Commercial Skip — My 4 years old VCR has something called commercial-marking, works like a charm.
Scheduling — Once, again, my 4 years old VCR can easily record a show on a daily, weekly or monthly basis. I just have to remember to change the tape when full. With VCR+ I just pickup my TV guide and find the code, not too hard. I think even my wife can do that. Well... maybe not. (Sorry, honey.)
Pausing Live TV — I can't do that. But I can record a show while watching another live, a single-tuner TiVo unit can't.
Instant Live TV Replay — I really can't do that. Don't call me while I watch TV, please.
Digital Recording — Yeah, cool, but so what?

I think Erik's comment about the VHS platform is a red herring. As we know, DVD players are being sold for less-than $50 these days, and the migration of video rental stores from VHS to DVD has been ongoing for years. I don't remember the last time I rented a VHS tape- it was quite some time ago.

Those of us who have had experience with Tivo or other PVRs understand intuitively what is so compelling about them, but they have not taken off within the mainstream...yet. I am convinced that the features of a DVR/PVR will end up in our TV-viewing experience, but it may not be as we might imagine it today. If anyone else has ideas about why Tivo hasn't taken off, even with all the celebrity endorsements, please leave us a comment.

Erik's Weblog : TiVO [thauvin.net]

by Gen Kanai March 7, 2004 in TiVo

Comments

I only sort of agree. There are a set of services that have incredible customer loyalty and ecstatic users -- but haven't crossed over to the mainstream, because it is too hard to message exactly what the benefit is.

Try summing up Tivo in a sentence that doesn't run into one of Erik's rebuttals.

(Btw, the others that I know of that are similar: Paytrust.com and Treo 600. Also fantastically loytal, happy, fanatical users, but not mainstream because their benefits can't be summed up in a sentence and the switching costs are high.)

Posted by: Tubby Bartles at Mar 7, 2004 9:47:39 PM

I've been coveting a TiVo for years now. But it's only just very recently that I actually got a PVR-- and it's the one from my cable service (Cox). Though I know that a TiVo or a ReplayTV would be better, 2 things were blocking my getting one previously.

First is the single tuner issue. Having something that doesn't allow me to watch a live show while something else is being recorded is just not doable for my situation. (Or rather, having something I can't be recording something while my roommate is watching TV). This is not the problem that's keeping the average person from adopting the technology, however.

The other, bigger, factor is price. It's just been way out of my budget. Even just getting the monthly service and not having to pay for the machine isn't really in my budget, but I'm trying it out for a little bit. This issue of pricing is I think the real explanation for why TiVo or other PVRs haven't completely taken off (and why the big growth seems to be in things like DirecTivo and the cable PVRs where the pricing is different and lower).

While I agree that there has been a communication or marketing gap, I think the fundamental reason comes down to price-- I don't think it will ever become completely mainstream at the current pricing structure.

Posted by: Molly at Mar 7, 2004 10:53:44 PM

Marketing can't solve everything. The main reason TiVo hasn't taken off in the mainstream is because it requires such a fundamental mindshift in the way you watch TV, and it's difficult for the average person to get it without sitting down and actually experiencing the thing. Widespread acceptance isn't going to happen overnight, but will slowly swell as the Word of TiVo is spread through word-of-mouth (the most powerful form of media there is). That's precisely why TiVo predicts exponential growth among their customer base over the next several years.

TiVo's not a sneaker or a soda--you can't just run a few TV spots or newspaper ads and expect everyone to understand. I think they're going the right route: cultivating their loyal fan following and encouraging them to tell their friends. Now if they can just get the OS licensing thing worked out with the cable companies, you won't see articles like this in five years.

Posted by: sixtoe at Mar 8, 2004 7:56:26 AM

I have to agree with sixtoe:

"The main reason TiVo hasn't taken off in the mainstream is because it requires such a fundamental mindshift in the way you watch TV"

I've had TiVo for a couple years now, and the way I watch TV now is significantly different than it was pre-TiVo. For me, watching TV at someone else's house is a little weird and almost difficult for me.

Also, when my relatives visit us, they're more upset by the slow channel changing (crappy IR changer!) than impressed with TiVo's features. When I tell them that I almost never change channels -- and that I *never* channel surf any more -- they just don't seem to grasp it. And they never think for a minute that they can pause and rewind live TV. It's just a completely different state of mind that doesn't easily change.

Posted by: KJC at Mar 8, 2004 10:14:30 AM

One thing mentioned in the comparison of PVR to VCR is the scheduling. Sure, VCR's can record shows daily, weekly, etc... However, can they adjust to when the network moves a show to a new day or time? Can they know if they have recorded a specific episode and not record it a second time? I think not! :)

Then there is the issue of the tapes. My original TiVo could hold nearly 3 tapes worth of recording without doing a thing. My current TiVo can hold over 13 tapes!

I've been in the VCR world and even used StarSight for a while for programming, but nothing beats a PVR. There are some thing I want my PVR to do, and from rumors I have been reading, it won't be long before I'll be able to burn shows I have recorded to DVD. I know there is a PVR that has a DVD burner in it, but I don't have that and really don't have the cash for it now. Maybe when the price is more affordable, I'll consider it.

Posted by: Dave at Mar 8, 2004 10:23:35 AM

Seriously, would anyone after having used a PVR go back to tape? I think the argument that a VCR can record Weekly, Monthly, etc. is ridiculous - while it can do that - it cannot do it in nearly the same fashion as a TiVo. I mean, I wouldn't even go back to my DVD+R.

Posted by: Kesey at Mar 8, 2004 4:17:29 PM

The VCR comparison is obnoxious. I couldn't even tell you where the VHS tapes are at Blockbuster or Hollywood.

Tivo has a few problems:
1) Cost - $13/month is a tough sell. Even though the box is failry cheap, it doesn't feel like you're getting $13 worth of service each month.
2) For more involved users, Replay can be better (especially program extraction, free web-based recording management, less obtrusive interface).
3) Tivo too influenced by broadcasters and studios. Replay still has program extraction and on-by-default skip.
4) People waiting for it to come bundled in set top device. Even though they will be far inferior, they will be good enough and the price will be right.
5) *Not* marketing. Tivo couldn't pay for the word of mouth that it gets.

Posted by: pb at Mar 8, 2004 11:42:56 PM

Price and mindset are the reasons, I think. There is also a learning curve. Even if you let somebody use the machine for a few minutes, it won't make them love it instantly.

I could care less how fast PVRs are getting adopted by the mainstream. I have one and I thoroughly enjoy its features and use it everyday. And I tell people about it if I think they might be the slightest bit interested.

The "problem" is this: before one is determined to get a PVR, one has to have a problem to solve. You have to be tired of missing favorite shows or adjusting your life around primetime shows or messing up programming the VCR. If I hear somebody complaining about that, I'll pitch ReplayTV to them. For example, I got my ReplayTV because I want to watch European/South American soccer, which is always on during working hours because of the time difference. The VCR never did a good job (tape often wasn't long enough, image quality got worse with every recording). Of course, I now inevitably only watch shows on the ReplayTV, soccer or not.

Posted by: Lucas at Mar 9, 2004 1:56:06 AM

Sixtoe and KJC:
Are you kidding? Calling your potential customer base clueless, dumb, or any combination thereof is the worst possible method of marketing. The fact that non-TiVo users are frustrated by the TiVo experience is the FAULT of marketing. TiVo hasn't focused on how having it will change how you watch TV. They pay lip service, but they fail to truly market that change to the consumer.
Erik Thauvin's analysis is quite cogent. My VCR does many of the things that my DVR does. So, what prompted me to build my MythTV box, rather than just use the VCR? Probably the number one reason was the elimination of tapes, labeled or unlabeled. Some VCR users may not have this problem. Other VCR users might not realize how much time savings one will gain when skipping commercials.
As for the original commentary from Gen Kanai, since when does renting a tape have anything to do with the TiVo/like experience? If anything the reduction of tape rentals and transition to DVD's is going to increase the life of your VCR far beyond what it used to be, because you won't be renting tapes and dirtying your VCR heads. Which would strongly correlate to reduced VCR sales.
I think instead, a clever marketing campaign would involve a side-by-side comparison of a TiVo owner doing something active, and outside the home, while you see his home (with the TV left on) and see TiVo switch channels and start recording something. While I recognize that it may not actually happen this way, it would illustrate an important aspect of what TiVo does. Then the consumer can come home, turn on his TV and find out that he didn't even intend to record the show, but hey, he definitely is interested in watching it. Forget celebrities. Forget evangelizing about how it will change your viewing experience, show them for goodness sake!
It's the simple truism, consumers don't buy features, they buy benefits; something that will solve a problem. Demonstrate a problem, show them a solution, and voila.

Posted by: Jonathan Link at Mar 9, 2004 6:01:03 AM

1) The phone line. Still not common in most family room entertainment centers. Any purchase involving a wiring project is delayed.

2) IR Blaster integration with legacy devices. Puts fear in the hearts of many with complex entertainment centers. Desynchronization is the bane of those who attempt to make their centers wife-friendly.

3) Many of us have moved on to HDTV. Which makes the devices available look increasingly obsolete in the near term.

Cable PVRs are surprisingly good. My parents (never able to program their VCR) have two. I will get one as soon as they are available since I can drop them at any time in favor of an HD solution.

Posted by: John Stafford at Mar 9, 2004 8:07:14 AM

As a former and potential future Tivo customer, my concerns are:
1 Tivo wants to rip us off on the higher capacity hard drives.
2 The Series 2 can't easily be hacked, so can't use most of the tips in Tivo books.
3 Commercial skip, standard on my VCR is non-negotiable for me, and non-standard on Tivo.
4 What, _still_ no HDTV?
5 That Tivo uses all its space, however large, guessing at what we might want to watch, rather than only recording what we requested, encourages TV addiction. My goal in getting a Tivo last time was to help our TV fan become more willing to be interrupted and watch less and better TV overall. Instead it doubled their TV time.
6 The phone link is a hassle. If we buy again, we'll want a WiFi adapter that can be easily set up.
7 Tivo still needs to be simpler to use. Yes, I know it's already fairly easy for gearheads like me to use, but our regular human viewer still had problems, and I got called on to fix glitches too often for my taste. We never have these problems with our VCR.
8 I don't like the "Gillette" strategy of a cheap initial cost and high monthly fee. If the "lifetime" fee were for the lifetime of the user, rather than the hardware, that would seem fair. But as it is, I'm more interested in "Tivo Basic" and Tivo-like devices that have no required ongoing costs.

Posted by: Man In The Middle at Mar 9, 2004 6:32:42 PM

I think its a cost/benefit disconnect. The first time I heard of TIVO, I thought, "so what, big deal!" Then, when I found out that the DVR cost somewhere around $300, and that a $12 per month subscription or $400 lifetime (of the DVR) subscription, I thought it was the stupidest thing I had ever heard of. Think of it; $700 so you can pause live TV. At the time, I'm not sure I had a TV worth $700. The idea of locking into another subscription video service bothered me as well. I remember first seeing DIVX units in Circuit City and thinking what a great idea, unless other people don't buy into it, then what would I do with a bunch of locked DVDs? That DID end up being a bad idea. So TIVO just didn't seem prudent.

Then, I saw it in use at a friend's house. After watching it for a few hours, I was intrigued. I could see how it changed the way you watch TV. But, still it just seemed like too much money for the benefit.

Later, I came across an openbox TIVO at GoodGuys. There was a $100 rebate for new subscribers, and the open box was on sale for $199. That meant I could get the box for $99 and pay for the subscription. I bought the lifetime subscription, hoping the box would last longer than 3 years.

Once I had it at home, I was hooked. It totally changes the way I watch TV. I don't spend hours each night wading through garbage to see the few things on each week that I'd actually like to watch. I can watch a week's worth of TV in one night.

It's kind of like DSL. If all you know is 56K dial up, then DSL might seem frivilous. But, when you find you can do in minutes what used to take you hours, it is a kind of a revelation (or is it a revolution?). Think of it! I used to spend $10/mo. for an ISP and got my money's worth, because I spent 3 or 4 hours per night on the computer. Now, I spend $39/mo for DSL, and only spend about 20 or 30 minutes a day on the computer. If I didn't "get it" I wouldn't want it.

The value isn't pausing live TV! It's time! Using TIVO allows us to see what we want, AND have time to do other things. TIVO is marketing the wrong stuff. Yes, a VCR can pause, record, rewind, etc. But TIVO and its simplicity gives you time. Now, I get it! I still don't want to pay $500 or $600 for a TIVO. But I will pay unimaginable sums for more time. Now TIVO seems like a bargain!

Posted by: A Grafals at Mar 9, 2004 6:32:50 PM

"Digital Recording — Yeah, cool, but so what?"

Whoah, hold the phone! Season passes, instant replay, and even commercial skipping don't hold a CANDLE to the benefits of digital recording. This one feature is what makes TiVo such a seismic shift in how I approach TV.

I used to be a rabid videocassette user.... 5-7 shows on a tape. The inability to watch shows in whatever order I desired... the requirement that I label everything immediately... the sheer "analog" nature of it all... made it inherently inefficient. Consistently fast forwarding on a VCR to get to the right start/stop point was not only an exercise in frustration, but also harmful to the hardware in the long run. (Sometimes I tried one tape per week night, just to keep it organized. That didn't last too long.)

The fact that I can watch one month's worth of "Curb Your Enthusiasm" episodes that I missed while I was out the past 4 Sundays... and delete just the middle two... is what makes TiVo different from a VCR. It's like a digital answering machine for your TV.

And the fact that I can come home at 8:20 on Thursday, start watching "Survivor" (that actually started at 8) without any stress... and "catch up" by FF'ing through commercials and be done by 9 alongside everyone else... now THAT's the true beauty of digital recording. Try *that* with a VCR.

Anyone who debates differently simply has never used TiVo for more than a week. I've seen it time and time again (with perhaps 100+ new TiVo converts under my belt?) The rabid enthusiasm from actual owners is also a very tempting target for trolls.

Posted by: Josh at Mar 9, 2004 6:45:07 PM

Oh yes, one more thing. Some of the complaints in this thread are addressed by the DirecTV with TiVo receiver. Upgrading to this setup was as mind-jolting to me as the jump from VCR to TiVo was in the first place.

In this integrated box, you get two tuners for simultaneous recording and no IR crap to deal with. Pure digital recording, so you don't need to choose "Basic/Better/Best" quality. Storage is easily upgradable. One TiVo fee covers all the DTiVo receivers in your house. And if you go for the premium package (or were grandfathered in with the one-time lifetime fee) you don't even have to pay monthly TiVo fees at all.

Series 1 is best since it's much easier to hack -- and Series 2, without any Home Media Option commitment from DTV at this point, offers no real benefit. I got two receivers for free after rebate about 2 years back. (Although I imagine Series 1 are hard to come by now?) You can install TiVoWeb to program it via the web (or your wireless PDA) and even extract video from it. I've got two units modulated to all the TV's in my house. That's instantaneous access, no need to even "wait" for it to start streaming a copy a la HMO. At this point, I couldn't be happier. I'm almost kinda resenting the HDTV push (believe me, I'm feelin' it...) and how that'll start to disrupt my delicate little TV nirvana.

Posted by: Josh at Mar 9, 2004 6:58:21 PM

The bad thing going for Tivo (one of them) is that it's just so damn hard to explain how great it really is. My wife and I were talking about how Tivo changed our watching habits (her's it decreased, mine increased - but both fundamentally changed for the better) but it's so difficult to explain Tivo to people who haven't used it for a month. Even sitting down and playing with a friend's for five minutes is not enough.

Someone mentioned that it's not simple enough, and then mentioned a VCR. I completely disagree. My parents, who are as close to being unconsciously Luddite without becoming 100% Amish, figured out Tivo in under 5 minutes. Their VCR, like mind did, is constantly flashing 12:00. There's no comparison. If there is more "user-friendliness" to a VCR, it's only because people have been using them for a solid 20 years, not because they're inherently more intuitive.

The basic problem with marketing Tivo is that you just can't relate its changes in 30 minutes of use, let alone a 30 second spot. Perhaps what Tivo has going for it is that it is becoming a vernicaular term in sitcoms. Of course, what is more likely is that you'll "tivo" things like you always use a "band-aid" or a "kleenex."

I don't think there's a solution. In fact, I'm fairly convinced that Tivo will become an artifact, the pioneers, but that it will be these cheapo generic PVRs attached to cable boxes that will become the norm. Sadly.

Posted by: John at Mar 10, 2004 1:40:37 PM

I think it really is a perception problem (so, that probably goes into the marketing bucket). My tivo-less friends all at one point thought the point was to watch one thing and record another...and that was THE most useful and compelling feature to them - I had to burst their bubbles on that one.

The other issue with them seems to be the perceived price. It's perceived as too expensive and yet they continually spend much more money on other things. Once friend had a $139 kvm switch languishing unopened in a closet while claiming that $149 tivo was too expensive. This is the same friend that recently spent thousands on a new TV.

I keep trying to pitch it as $149 now and under $15/mo since I think the lifetime subscription option makes TiVo seem really expensive (even though it can be more cost-effective). They basically all want it, but don't feel *justified* in the expense. And they all intend to buy it "sometime".

TiVo just never cracked the "gotta have it" jones for the masses (yet?). And the evangelical efforts of the current customer base (me!!!) doesn't seem to cut it.

Posted by: Caitlin at Mar 11, 2004 6:02:16 AM

Tivo hasn't taken off, in my opinion, because there's too much upfront commitment. Most people don't even understand how it works. You have to connect a phone line. You have to pay 13 bucks a month in addition to the device.

I have a (very crappy) Scientific Atlanta DVR that I lease from Time Warner Cable for about $12 a month - total. The only reason I have it is because I knew I could easily, and immediately, return it if I didn't like it. I got to learn what it was about that way. I doubt I would have paid three hundred bucks to "learn about" a Tivo, even though I'm dead certain the Tivo is greatly superior to the crappy SciAtl DVR.

DVRs will quickly gain popular acceptance through cable companies. Despite my PVR's general crappiness, I nonetheless set one up for my mom because it totally transforms the TV-watching experience. The control and convenience is awesome, even in crappy DVRs.

Posted by: Slippery Pete at Mar 11, 2004 10:44:54 AM

So my point is - Tivo should have linked up with cable companies and used them for distribution (or - better yet - licensing, since Time Warner's SciAtl DVRs are so crappy). Going it alone is a losing strategy for Tivo.

Posted by: Slippery Pete at Mar 11, 2004 10:46:00 AM

One other comment. I think another barrier to DVR acceptance is that the VCR was, without question, one of the worst designed consumer devices of the past twenty years. It's hard to imagine VCRs being any more clumsy and annoying to program and use. Playing stuff is relatively easy. Recording stuff significantly harder. Programming a recording, on most VCRs, is absurdly difficult.

I know VCR+ is easy, and I know certain brands are much easier than others to use. But, on the whole, they're a phenomenal pain in the ass. And most average consumers know this all too well.

And when they hear about all the wonderful benefits of DVRs, they assume anything that's 10 times better than a VCR is 10 times harder to use, especially when the words "hard drive" make an appearance.

That's another reasons they're reluctant to drop hundreds of dollars down on an unknown like this.

Posted by: Slippery Pete at Mar 11, 2004 10:56:09 AM

I use my TiVo without the monthly subscription (I'm in the UK btw). I don't really need that facility, and some say that without that it's not worth having. I disagree. I could never do without TiVo now, not for a VCR nor for a DVD+R. The fact that everything I ever watch is programmed in (OK, manually) gives me great peace of mind about not missing something (or not missing the start of something if we watch it "live"). The pause and replay TV facilities are a must. The ability to skip through programs at high speed; having 40 hours of stuff without having to change tapes... it goes on and on. TiVo never took off here, and Thomson stopped making them. I'm not even sure if you can still buy TiVos. But Sky+ has now taken off big style. It's a market leader and multiple award winner, and it's just TiVo for Satellite TV, tied into 1 provider and with some annoying nuances. But at least it's meant PVRs are now more mainstream in the UK.

Posted by: Steve at Mar 17, 2004 3:10:00 PM

I think tivo is much better than a VCR. With some channels changing program times, it makes a VCR worthless. However, I do have complaints about tivo. The fact that you can only record one thing at a time is my main problem. For those of us with cable boxes, there is no reason a tivo couldn't record two shows at once. It would just require a minor software upgrade. The fact that you have to purchase home option in order to transfer a program from one box to another is just plain a rip off. I like my tivo, however I am eagerly awaiting the next generation of practical usage DVRs.

Posted by: David Morrison at Mar 27, 2004 6:25:24 PM

Three phrases should be among the most common in our daily usage. They are: Thank you, I am grateful and I appreciate.

Posted by: big cock at Dec 3, 2005 7:17:52 PM

Tivo's poor marketing?

Comments

Post a Comment

On this site

Recent Comments

Advertising