TiVo deathwatch rebuttal

« No new Windows Media Center in 2005 (sorta) | Main | TiVo and Comcast in "advanced talks" »

TiVo deathwatch rebuttal

Frequent PVRblog commenter MegaZone has posted his response to rumors of TiVo's death (short version: they're greatly exaggerated). We've covered the TiVo deathwatch a little, and MegaZone makes some pretty good arguments that things are going to be OK.

On the financial situation:

Fiscal 2005 just ended, 2006 is to be about profitability. They will be cutting back on rebates and promotions (so you might want to buy now, before the current rebate program ends). They paid off their long term securities debts at an accelerated pace in 2005, leaving them without that burden for 2006 and beyond. They came out with the 'night light' S2 units in 2005, investing in engineering to reduce production costs of the HW.

On TiVo's lack of HDTV offerings:

So it is really the early adopters pissing and moaning that because TiVo isn't giving them what they want right away that they must be 'out of touch' and a dying company. Which is just asinine. If TiVo can deliver HD products in fiscal 2006, as they've said, that should be well in time to still catch the market on the start of the growth curve. In the meantime their SD products suit the vast majority of users just fine.

On DirecTV:

First of all, DirecTV has no plans to drop TiVo support. The existing agreement allows them to support users indefinitely, and they'd be stupid to turn off ~2million systems. They're not that dumb. Even if they did stop selling new units, and even that isn't clear - TiVo says that when/if the NDS units ship they will do what is needed to remain a competitor - TiVo gets revenue from the existing users. But even if they did lose that, DTV is less than 10% of their revenue. They may be nearly 2/3 of the total subscriber base, but TiVo gets just over $1 a month per user.

Frankly, the whole "TiVo-will-die" thing is getting a little old for me. I would like to see some dates from the critics about the estimated time of death; if they don't get their act together by 2006 they'll die? 2007? Tuesday?

Also, I assume the hacker community would come up with new guide data for the stand-alone units fairly quickly, so what would TiVo's death actually mean to me as a customer? The only thing I can think of is I'd have $13 more a month, so maybe I should be rooting for their demise...

by George Hotelling March 12, 2005 in TiVo

Comments

Still... tivo will die... comcast is gonna kill it just like microsoft killed netscape... then tivo will go into oblivion.. like atari and commodore...

Posted by: hwack at Mar 12, 2005 2:25:12 PM

The hard drive in my 18-month old Series 2 died this week. So I ordered a larger replacement last night. I wouldn't have done that if I had any concern over TiVo's future. As infuriated as I get with them, I think they have made the progress necessary to handle most anything.

Posted by: Michael k Pate at Mar 12, 2005 2:41:06 PM

Well, it was a surprise to see my little rant turn up here. :-)

Sure, TiVo will die - just like Microsoft killed Apple. And just like the Yugo killed Mercedes. And all those cheap Chinese DVD players kicked Sony, Pioneer, et al, right out of the market.

Oh, wait....

TiVo is not going to be the largest DVR vendor, that's not in any doubt. But there is always a market for products with more features, more usability, and a reasonable price. TiVo reported a profit on operations for the last quarter, the losses were due to expenditures on growing their customer base - rebates, advertising, and channel promotions. If they pulled back and lived with lower growth there is no reason they can't turn a profit from the existing users.

A lot of their sales also come from word of mouth. Things like the TiVo Rewards program is a minimal expense to help drive that. By more than doubling their userbase in fiscal 2005 they have a pool of people twice the size to help drive word of mouth sales. They also placed TiVo on my store shelves in F2005, which boosts sales. So they have more organic growth to live with too.

There is also the IP lawsuit against Echostar. These suits always drag out, but it could be an important event. If TiVo wins then Echostar will have to license TiVo's patents, and TiVo will have a big stick to use on Motorola, Scientific Atlanta, Microsoft, etc, to get license agreements out of them. It could also help in licensing to 3rd parties - if they have to pay a fee anyway to use some other DVR software, maybe they're more willing to pay a little more and use the real thing.

Patents are also useful defensively. Other vendors do have patents that apply to DVRs, and if TiVo is ever in violation they may be able to settle it with a patent swap and no espenditure. Which is what happened with ReplayTV a few years back.

There are many other unknowns, like HME. If someone really develops a Killer App for HME then it'd be more fodder to help license the software. TiVo is already providing many features you can't get, at least at this time, from the cable company DVRs. As they said on the call this week, they're looking to compete on value, not on price. Instead of trying to slog it out at $10/month DVR vs. DVR, they're trying to be a better DVD *and* offer online features, music & photos, integration with portable devices, DVD burning, etc. Staying well ahead in the feature race, while keeping the same fees. The real advantage of the cable DVRs today is the ability to record HD content and multiple-tuners, in some units. CableCARD will bring both to TiVo - but the cable industry is really dragging their feet on full compliance, because they don't want the competition from vendors like TiVo. They want to keep you locked into their cable box.

Posted by: MegaZone at Mar 12, 2005 4:52:17 PM

Oh, and George, the hacker commuity has already delivered. Look at communities like TiVo Canada and OzTiVo (Australia) - they've already developed ways to feed units guide data to use in areas where TiVo doesn't have a service. The same methods are just as applicable within the US, but most people are moral enough not to use them and pay for the service since it is offered. But if TiVo really did shut down completely, you know there'd be hacks out in a flash.

But even if TiVo is forced into bankruptcy, I doubt things would shut down. Assuming they can't restructure - and that's a big assumption, it seems like bankruptcy reorganization is a corporate sport these days - someone would buy them. ReplayTV went bankrupt *twice* and they're still operating, customers are still getting service. First they went bankrupt as a standalone company, and SonicBlue bought them. Then SB went bankrupt and DNNA picked up the remains of RTV at the auction. TiVo has a MUCH larger user base, a larger IP portfolio, several valuable licensing agreements, and a much more advanced code base. Someone would pick them up. Perhaps Sony, or one of their other licensees. (Seems more likely than Apple, really.)

Posted by: MegaZone at Mar 12, 2005 5:02:55 PM

But...when the mainstream public, Joe-Six-Pack-TV-watcher catches up and gets an HDTV, is he going to pay

1) The cable company and extra $5 a month for HD service
2) $1000 for the TiVo Hardware (+ whatever the cost of 2 cablecards from the cable company will be)
3) TiVo subscription cost

OR will he

1) Pay the cable company $10/month for the HD Service with included Dual-tuner DVR (which if it breaks or the HDD fails at any time - he can get a new one at no cost)

This is hands down, a no thought process, decision. If TiVo expects to stay alive - they MUST find a way to team up with the cable campanies...and that may be too late.

Posted by: Bryan at Mar 13, 2005 8:49:46 AM

I'd hardly call people with HDTV early adopters at this point in time!

If Tivo were on their game they would have released a standalone HD box by last Christmas.

Posted by: White at Mar 13, 2005 8:56:52 AM

Unfortunately MegaZone is not a DirecTV insider, and so his comments are incorrect. Tivo isn't going to be able to 'do anything' against the competing products leveraging internal political clout. It has nothing to do with who has the best features, sorry to say.

Posted by: NoOne at Mar 13, 2005 3:21:23 PM

White,

Actually the HDTV market is still considered to be an early market. The overall penetration is very low at this point. Until recently the majority of people buying new TVs were still buying NON-HD sets. And, as I said, the total number of HDTVs sold is a drop in the bucket compared to the overall installed based of TV owners in the US. And a lot of people with HDTVs still don't have them hooked up to any HD programming source, they're not using them for anything more than 480p DVD playback.

Look at the home recorder market - DVRs & DVD Recorders, even PC capture cards - now how many of those systems can handle HDTV? How many of those only do OTA ATSC? Now how many can handle Cable HD?

That's what I thought.

The market for devices that can only do OTA ATSC is too small to pursue. Zenith had a DVR that did this, and it didn't sell well. Most users want something that can do Satellite or Cable. Satellite has solutions - and DirecTV's is a TiVo (and, BTW, at CES DirecTV said that at this time NDS won't be doing HD, only TiVo). The only way to do CableHD effectively as a 3rd party is CableCARD.

CC only rolled out in the middle of last year, and it has had a painful gestation, with cable companies dragging their feet as much as possible. CC 1.0 is also unidirectional and single-stream. So you need a card for each tuner.

The current regulations would require the cable companies to switch to using CC in their own boxes by July 2006. That would force them to get with it and ratify CC 2.0, which is bi-direction and multi-stream. So you could have one card that supports multiple tuners, VOD, PPV, etc. But the cable companies, trying to stave off competition, are fighting to have the deadline pushed back - so they can drag their feet on CC2.0.

TiVo is one of the consumer electronics companies pushing to keep the deadline, and they're also pushing for an interim release of a uni-directional, multi-stream card (multi-stream can be implemented separately without trouble) by the end of this year to allow recording multiple streams with one card.

If you looked around you'd see that the current CC spec isn't really supported outside of some HDTV sets. Most of the CE industry is waiting for multi-stream and/or bidirectional, because that's where the real power is. And units manufactured to handle only CC 1.0 won't support the future systems, it is a HW change.

Again, if you look at the HD market it is still very low on the adoption curve, and the CE vendors, including TiVo, know they have time to do things right instead of trying to rush out the door. The first to market is often handicapped by being tied to the oldest technology.

This is precisely one of the annoying, spurious arguments I was referring to. If you take the time to look at the markets you'll see that not having HD yet really makes very little difference to TiVo - or any of the other players.

They're better off developing a solid product that provides more value than the cable company boxes, and time is also on their side in that component costs drop so the price of the unit can be more competitive when it ships. Even one year can make a difference of a few hundred dollars.

Right now the vast majority of consumers are watching SD TVs, using SD programming sources, and recording SD. One of the hottest market segments in CE is DVD Recorders - which record SD.

If TiVo is behind the times, so are Toshiba, Pioneer, Panasonic, and all the other CE vendors who make DVRs and don't have a CableCARD unit out yet.

And Sony's DHG-HDD250 and DHG-HDD500 are really tearing up the market, aren't they?

Posted by: MegaZone at Mar 13, 2005 4:50:12 PM

Bryan,

I know a number of people, myself included, who will by a CableCARD TiVo and not use a cable company box. Unless something radically shifts I can get a cable company box which is a passable DVR, and that's it.

The CableCARD TiVo will also be dual-tuner (perhaps more, CC Multi-Stream is supposed to do up to 5 streams on one card). So that's a wash.

With that I'd have a system that is a better DVR - better UI, scheduling, searching, etc. Supports online scheduling, music & photos, sharing content within the home, and moving content to a PC and mobile media devices.

Add to that features that should be rolling out this year - moving content from PCs back to the TiVo (hello media server), Home Media Engine and all the cool applications starting to appear for that, broadband content distribution, on-box ecommerce, etc.

Yes, I am willing to spend more for a system that can do more for me. I also pay lifetime on my units, not monthly.

But even given monthly, cable HD DVRs are usually about a $10 fee on top of the standard box rental fees. With a CableCARD DVR you don't need a box at all - all those fees go away. The card itself usually costs $1-$2 a month.

The up-front cost of the HW isn't known yet. DirecTV charged $1000 for their box because they can - people would pay it, so they soaked the early adopters. That's FAR more than the unit costs to make, and there have already been deals to bring it down well below that. Sony sells the DHG-HDD250 CableCARD DVR, with a 250GB drive, for $799. And remember Sony makes all of their profit on that one sale. TiVo's model is to sell the HW for less - usually around, or below, the cost - since they have a subscription. (The cell phone model.) So it is certainly possible that TiVo could sell a unit with comparable HW specs to the Sony, for much less. And time is on their side as well, as the component costs continue to decline. You can build the same for less, or build more for the same.

I do think there are plenty of people willing to pay to own a box that can do more for them. My monthly fees would be *lower* with a TiVo monthly sub + CC rental than they would be for a cable DVR. And the system would do a lot more for me. When Pioneer came out with the TiVo/DVD recorders the MSRP was over $1000, and they still sold. I waited to get my 810H, it was down to ~$700. A year later Humax had a comparable unit you could get for ~$400. Prices drop rapidly. I see no reason to believe the same wouldn't happen to TiVo HD units. (DirecTV isn't a great example - they have a closed ecosystem - you buy for them only, you want it, you pay their prices - or you switch to a different system.)

I've tried a few of the cable company DVRs - it is worth paying for the TiVo just to not have to deal with the cable company software.

Posted by: MegaZone at Mar 13, 2005 5:06:17 PM

NoOne,

I was repeating what Mike Ramsay, and others from TiVo, have said. That they'll do what they have to to be competitive with NDS for the DTV contracts. And at CES I had DTV reps tell me they were still working on new HW with TiVo, and that was in January. So things don't seem to be as dead as some would have it, at least not yet.

NDS still has to deliver on their promises. And Murdoch is all about making money. If TiVo can offer something that gives DTV more ROI, they have a shot. But, as TiVo has said, even if they completely lost DirecTV in one fell swoop, it wouldn't be a disaster. They get a minimal (<10%) amount of their revenue from DTV, and DTV has prevented their users from having the more advanced features of TiVo anyway. While DTV has been useful for building raw subscriber numbers, it hasn't exactly been filling TiVo's coffers. And that userbase is unreachable for value-added premium services since DirecTV controls them. So those users aren't as valuable to TiVo as a standalone user.

Posted by: MegaZone at Mar 13, 2005 5:12:18 PM

MegaZone,

Like I said you aren't an insider -- they can't be competitive with NDS since NDS is part of Murdoch's empire, even though they have a better product. NDS doesn't 'have to' deliver on anything, they already own it. You won't read that in any press release, and you won't hear it from some rep.

Also, NDS aren't the only ones working on next-gen DTV PVRs. There are a half dozen others.

You had better believe Tivo is downplaying a DTV loss - it will hurt them to lose the business (even though they are bringing DTV a huige amount of new subs).

The brightest move for Tivo would be to move to E*. Forget the cablecards - the cablecos are a. cheap, b. always pushing off bankrupcy (nevermind half the time they run endless 'trials' and pull the plug) and c. owned by SA and Motorola (Tivo doesn't have a hope in hell competing against these two). Tivo doesn't have the engineering capacity to fight off these two when they perceive Tivo to be a threat.

Posted by: NoOne at Mar 13, 2005 6:59:16 PM

I've worked for large corproates, like Lucent and GTE Internetworking, so I know all too well how internal politics work. NDS is part of Murdoch's empire, but he's not shy about going 'outside the family' if he feels he can make more money that way. And it is already clear he will do so - the new media center unit they were showing at CES used UCentric's software (now owned by Motorola), not NDS. DirecTV is willing to use other DVR vendors. The final word hasn't been heard, it isn't a forgone conclusion that TiVo is out after the current agreement is over in 2007. NDS hasn't delivered a working box for DTV yet. I'm sure they will in time, but when exactly, and with what features?

I suspect one of the reasons DTV hasn't allowed TiVo to deploy advanced feaures on DirecTiVo units is because it would raise the bar for NDS, or other vendors.

Since TiVo is suing Echostar for patent violation, it is feasible that Echostar could decide to settle by just licensing the TiVo software. One thing I haven't been able to find is if the agreement with DirecTV is exclusive or not. Can TiVo license to another satellite company before the DTV deal expires?

TiVo would be fools to ignore CableCARD - cable is a bigger market. And CableCARD is a federal mandate, it has to work with *any* cable provider. CableCARD has nothing to do with a cable vendor deal - quite the opposite. CableCARD eliminates the need for a cable box. And if the FCC doesn't wimp out and delay the deadline, the cable companies will have to use CC in their own boxes by July 2006. Which means 3rd parties, like TiVo, would be able to provide all the features of a cable box.

Which is why the cable industry is dragging their feet and trying to push off the deadline, they don't want to lose their monopoly.

So far Scientific Atlanta's DVR efforts have been less than impressive. Motorola licenses Moxi from Digeo, and just acquired UCentric, which gives them much better software options.

Posted by: MegaZone at Mar 13, 2005 9:08:15 PM

Just been reading the tit-for-tat and have a few comments...

I also think the TiVo deathwatch thing has run a bit ahead of the facts. I still worry that it’s done permanent damage to TiVo’s ability to sign new customers, but only time will tell.

I agree with MegaZone on most of the issues he raises. However, I also think he missed a big reason why TiVo has a solid future ahead of it. IT IS NOT BEHOLDEN TO ANY CARRIER. Quite contrary to what Brian had to say, lack of a deal with one of the cablecos could actually turn out to be a blessing. (Same with the NDS option.) Both cable and satellite (and the burgeoning telco-cable wannabes) are going to try like hell to maintain a command-and-control infrastructure for content delivery. If they open their networks up to any content vie the Internet, they immediately begin the process of eroding the value of their infrastructure and begin to shift consumer attention away from their existing content pools. These trends spell problems for any incumbent (although cable will weather this transition better than satellite).

The bottom line is that Moto and SA are in the cablecos pockets. NDS and (obviously) EchoStar for the satcos. None of these vendors are going to open their networks up to users downloading Internet content to their devices (at least no content that hasn’t been blessed by their cable/satco masters first.) If TiVo decides to take advantage of this opportunity (which it appears they are doing), they have a critical strategic advantage over their competitors. If they can bridge this gap to cableco 2.0 and Internet video takes off over the next 18 months like it should, TiVos value proposition (aka access to content unavailable via any cable or sat network) will begin to create a solid value proposition that will continue their current growth trajectory for some time to come.

Moto and SA are going to own the low end of the market. TiVo will be a niche player for the next couple of years. But they can survive and indeed prosper on the back of Internet video. I think it’ll be their saving grace.

Posted by: Alex Rowland at Mar 14, 2005 12:05:43 AM

There is another thing missing - the market isn't just the US. TiVo has stated that they plan to expand into overseas markets, and if you watch the jobs they've posted they've been hiring people able to develop non-English UIs. Personally I suspect Humax will be part of that, since they're well established as a global vendor and it seems TiVo and Humax have a very close relationship.

Posted by: MegaZone at Mar 14, 2005 1:58:34 AM

HDTV was a budding market 3 years ago. Right now you can walk into any major store that sells televisions (Best Buy, Circuit City, Walmart, etc) and their HDTV offerings outnumber non-HDTV offerings. The HDTV adoption "curve" has already been and gone a year ago, which is when Tivo needed their HDTV tuner available to the masses. Early adopters stopped bitching years ago when they realised Tivo wasn't making any progress and mostly rent a Moxi now or whatever their provider offers. They're so popular now it isn't even funny. And you know what? They stink as DVRs and people still use them. It's so sad they've missed that boat.

Posted by: Papa at Mar 14, 2005 8:52:22 AM

Once again, off the mark (but close on some). Working for 'other' big companies doesn't mean you know the internal politics of these two (or three, or whatever). I work for one of these (I won't say which one). So, here are my comments:
- Humax works with *all* players - they just make boxes to spec.
- Tivo will have to compete against the likes of Akimbo for 'internet' service. There is no critical strategic advantage - don't think that internet delivery is cutting edge - it isn't. Many R&D projects have been run in the past using it as a delivery model. I can tell you now that these are doomed to fail, since no studio will trust their content to internet delivery in the near future. So unless Tivo plans on delivering porn...
- DTV showing other solutions at CES is all part of the political game. Doesn't mean they are going to ship.
- Murdoch won't use anything except what he owns unless something 'really bad' happens. DirecTV will become another Sky. Deploying the same PVR makes sense (a low-, mid- and high-end version).
- Opening up your network to the internet doesn't mean you will erode your content pool - it means the studios won't give you any content. Internet delivery in 18 months? Pfft - where did you drag that number out of?
- Raising the bar on advanced features - not so. Their better positioned competitors have patents on advanced technology features that Tivo lacks (like news segmenting, etc.). There is no fear there.
- Things will be more clear by CES time next year.

Posted by: NoOne at Mar 14, 2005 9:33:56 AM

My 2 cents; HDTV is definitely in early adoption phase and Tivo didn't "miss that boat". I found this blurb from research done in the 3rd quarter of 2004.

"Recent research has established that the percentage of households with a high definition-capable TV - HDTV - set nearly doubled in the past year, with seven per cent of households in the United States having an HDTV at the end of the third quarter of 2004.

Adoption of HDTV sets continues to be spurred by higher-income consumers, suggests the report, HDTV: Awareness, Interest and Intent to Purchase 2004, published by Leichtman Research Group (LRG). Nevertheless, LRG considers that the situation remains unclear, even among early adopters, observing that while 86 per cent of adults have heard of HDTV, consumers in general still have a limited knowledge of HDTV."

Full story here:
http://www.satexpo.it/en/news-new.php/1?c=51048

Admit it, WE are early adopters. If you have doubts, consider the fact that you are posting/reading messages on a blog dedicated to PVR's.

Posted by: Tyson at Mar 14, 2005 9:41:00 AM

NoOne. Hmmm. You sound like you work for one of these *big* companies, so I’ll excuse you for having your head in the sand on a few of these issues…

1. What possible defensible advantage does Akimbo have over TiVo in the delivery of Internet content? They’re currently selling a device that is more expensive than TiVo and has no access to cable and satellite content. You don’t pull consumers into niche content with niche content, you pull them in with mass market and drag them down the tail. Once TiVo adds the capability to receive IP video, Akimbo will have to work harder to distance itself from its early efforts in the hardware biz to stay in the game.
2. As for your other comments on Internet delivery, they’re so off base I’m not sure they deserve to be shot down, but here goes anyway… Studios will never deliver content over the Internet? That’s funny, I thought MovieLink and CinemaNow were doing that today. That seems a good deal sooner than never, but maybe I’m wrong. The fact is that the appropriate infrastructure to deliver video over the Internet hasn’t really been in place (and still really isn’t) for most consumers. At least for real time delivery (or streaming). The PVR movement has provided some storage at the edge of the network where consumers typically like watching video, in front of the TV. This has fundamentally changed the outlook for Internet video over the next few years.
3. I can’t believe you’re dissing porn as a way to deliver value to consumers. Last I checked, porn was a pretty good bellwether for the direction of Internet content and the monetization of that content. But you’re missing the larger trend. Do you really think that once the Internet starts to really transform the cost metrics of video distribution and marketing that the studios will still be the only game in town for content? I think you’re living in the past on that one.
4. Since when did TiVo need permission from studios to deliver their content? Last I checked TiVo was a consumer device that allowed you to capture what the cableco, satco or OTA broadcast was already delivering over their networks. Studios can’t shut off TiVo’s access to their content (without shutting off the cableco), whether TiVo allows for IP content or not. This is the beauty of devices sold directly to consumers. TiVo can deliver both standard mass-market fare and gradually add in Internet video as it appears on the network. It’s a consistently improving value proposition that will eventually more than justify the additional investment in hardware and service. (People aren’t pissed about paying for hardware to get access to new content, they’ve been doing it for satellite by the millions. What they don’t want to do is pay for a service like IPG data. It just doesn’t seem valuable. Once TiVo says, yeah, pay for our box, just like you would a sat box and we’ll give you access to satellite content (or cable content), all our nifty features, and Internet content for a monthly fee-with some content bundled with the service, you’ll hear a lot less complaining from consumers.)
5. As for the 18 month figure. I would wager that you will see more video content delivered over the Internet in the fourth quarter of 2006 than all the video that has been delivered to over the Internet in the last decade. And I think I may be understating the trend. So yes, it won’t be “mass-market” at that point, but it’ll certainly be hitting its stride.

Just a last note on the HDTV thing. TiVo has not missed the boat. Go ask the average consumer what kind of HDTV he has (I’ll bet a lot have an ED set and think they’ve got an HD set) and what kind of resolution it has. Then ask them how much HD content they’re actually watching. HDTV is going to be huge over the next 3-4 years as people finally begin to settle on a consistent format and HD-DVD/Blu-Ray begin to make an entry into the market. But right now, even the 7% figure overstates the utility those 7% are actually getting out of their HD sets. I’ve got HD set and I would say I spend 85% of my time watching SD content. (Most of my HD actually comes over the Internet, not even via DirecTV’s abysmally compressed HD service.) As long as TiVo deals with the HD issue aggressively this year, they’ll be fine. (But they also shouldn’t wait any longer.)

Posted by: Alex Rowland at Mar 14, 2005 10:55:18 AM

Suppose there was a strong reason why TiVo refused to back off the 10MM sub # on the conference call despite lower marketing spend going forward. As always, no deal may materialize...
------------------------------------------
Comcast, TiVo Are Discussing A Partnership

By NICK WINGFIELD and PETER GRANT
Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
March 15, 2005

After years of fruitless efforts by TiVo Inc. to forge an alliance with a cable-TV company, the maker of digital video recorders is in advanced talks with cable giant Comcast Corp. about a partnership that could greatly expand TiVo's audience.

TiVo is negotiating an agreement under which the company would develop a version of its service -- which helps viewers easily record television programs onto a disk drive -- that Comcast would offer as an option to its cable subscribers, according to people familiar with the matter. The companies have flirted with an alliance in the past, and the current discussions could still fall through, these people say.

Terms of the proposed partnership between Comcast and TiVo couldn't be learned.

For Comcast, an agreement would give the company the ability to offer high-end TiVo digital video recorders to complement the DVR business Comcast launched last year with boxes mostly manufactured by Motorola Inc., according to a person familiar with the discussions. Comcast would likely charge more for the TiVo service than the Motorola service -- which goes for about $10 a month -- because TiVo offers features not currently available on most of Comcast's standard Motorola boxes, such as recommendations of programs.

Comcast would likely offer the TiVo service as an option to all of its 21.5 million cable subscribers, as well as to 18.5 million other households that have access to its cable systems but don't currently take service, according to a person familiar with the matter. For DVRs to work, customers have to buy an upscale tier of cable service known as digital cable, which costs about $10 a month extra. About 40% of Comcast's customers take digital service.

Posted by: New York at Mar 14, 2005 8:44:16 PM

Doesn't this deathwatch stuff seem pretty stupid now?

Posted by: Anonymous coward at Mar 15, 2005 10:50:39 AM

As someone who used Tivo before and Comcast DVR now, I can tell you this is a match made in heaven. Comcast software SUCKS. Tivo has no HD-capable hardware.

Hello synergy!

Posted by: TallDave at Jun 29, 2005 1:05:49 PM

TiVo deathwatch rebuttal

Comments

Post a Comment

On this site

Recent Comments

Advertising