I remember those days, I think a lot of customers didn't understand how powerful a DVR was and the value it brought. The first 501 we got in I took home, I think it was $350 retailer cost and I thought it was a steal.
Dishplayer
- Thread starter mrbreeze640
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 33
- Views 4K
I remember those days, I think a lot of customers didn't understand how powerful a DVR was and the value it brought. The first 501 we got in I took home, I think it was $350 retailer cost and I thought it was a steal.
You might be right, it's been a long time but I don't remember dealer cost on a 501 being $150. I remember the upgrade on DHA being $50
Wasn't the 501 launched before DHA? iirc It was a pricey upgrade that they subsidized down to only $50 when DHA was launched. I'll have to dig through some old fax blasts and retailer chats
I believe you are spot on about the mentality of the average customer. The "no upfront cost" model is burned into the minds of the consumer.
I mentioned this on the Orby forum recently. There is a $250 cost to entry for basic Orby service (and that's without a DVR). If you do the math, a savings could be realized for the customer after 6-12 months. But how many consumers are willing to do the math? They know some providers will subsidize all equipment and install costs. They want "free."
My wife was pissed when I purchased my DISHplayer. She said we already had a VCR to record things...
Then she starting using it... and now she can't watch TV without a DVR.
Then she starting using it... and now she can't watch TV without a DVR.
yes memories.... I remember starting my satellite tv ownership with Primestar, back in the roaring 90's. I think you still had to use VCR for recording
We started out with a 301 and added a Series 2 TiVo which could accept composite video input. Later Got a 510 then a 622.
This is a really old thread, but I have to respond to the beating up of the consumer:
First, a lot of people either don't have the cash or find it too much of a stress on the home budget, and this is precisely why TiVo never got into as many homes as it could have. TiVo forever remained a niche luxury item for the wealthy and affluent.
Meanwhile, Dish with its new strategy of "giving away" DVR's with the cost usually being either a modest upgrade, then later no upgrade at all for new customers, allowed Dish to have MORE DVR's in more homes than ANY other company by far, and that is the reason TiVo sued Dish FIRST: because Dish having the most DVR's out there in people's homes meant a bigger PAY DAY for TiVo and an example set for others TiVo had sued should TiVo win its lawsuit or if Dish chose to play ball with TiVo and offer TiVo's to Dish customers instead of Dish DVR's or just paid TiVo a licensing fee FOREVER (the life of the patent, really) on all those DVR's in all those homes that were deemed "offending" by TiVo in the lawsuit.
And TiVo lovers loved to bang on the consumer for choosing a "cheap cable DVR" instead of the far superior TiVo product, and the vast majority of cable subscribers with DVR's, over time, did have those "Cable co DVR's" because they did not require a full retail purchase price of a TiVo for which you were responsible for paying to repair if it came to that. Oh, and because TiVo wanted its money for its product, all TiVo's were assessed an additional charge making TiVo even MORE too expensive compared to the Cable DVR that had no such "TiVo tax" added.
It made more sense to the monthly budget to get a no up-front cost DVR with only a monthly fee and both Cable and Dish would replace your non-functioning or unreliable DVR at no cost (although Dish would charge shipping if no DHPP).
The point is, people live on a month to month basis, and they know that it is cheaper in the long-run if they pay full price, but they can't afford that or it would be a foolish expenditure at one time full price when they may need that money for a car repair or whatever. So, the only way we can afford such a device is to do the low cost per month--forever, but it keeps the hundreds of dollars free to pay for the car repair or unexpected plumbing bill. That's what life is like for those who are not as affluent as some on this forum, and it is, for those with less financial resources the only way they can enjoy a DVR or a car or a house or a refrigerator or whatever expensive item.
Even businesses and some of the biggest companies do the same thing, especially when what matters more in placing value on a business is how much CASH they have on hand, it makes more sense to lease or rent or pay the low price every month or quarter and stash the cash for its books. Sorry, 'nuf said
First, a lot of people either don't have the cash or find it too much of a stress on the home budget, and this is precisely why TiVo never got into as many homes as it could have. TiVo forever remained a niche luxury item for the wealthy and affluent.
Meanwhile, Dish with its new strategy of "giving away" DVR's with the cost usually being either a modest upgrade, then later no upgrade at all for new customers, allowed Dish to have MORE DVR's in more homes than ANY other company by far, and that is the reason TiVo sued Dish FIRST: because Dish having the most DVR's out there in people's homes meant a bigger PAY DAY for TiVo and an example set for others TiVo had sued should TiVo win its lawsuit or if Dish chose to play ball with TiVo and offer TiVo's to Dish customers instead of Dish DVR's or just paid TiVo a licensing fee FOREVER (the life of the patent, really) on all those DVR's in all those homes that were deemed "offending" by TiVo in the lawsuit.
And TiVo lovers loved to bang on the consumer for choosing a "cheap cable DVR" instead of the far superior TiVo product, and the vast majority of cable subscribers with DVR's, over time, did have those "Cable co DVR's" because they did not require a full retail purchase price of a TiVo for which you were responsible for paying to repair if it came to that. Oh, and because TiVo wanted its money for its product, all TiVo's were assessed an additional charge making TiVo even MORE too expensive compared to the Cable DVR that had no such "TiVo tax" added.
It made more sense to the monthly budget to get a no up-front cost DVR with only a monthly fee and both Cable and Dish would replace your non-functioning or unreliable DVR at no cost (although Dish would charge shipping if no DHPP).
The point is, people live on a month to month basis, and they know that it is cheaper in the long-run if they pay full price, but they can't afford that or it would be a foolish expenditure at one time full price when they may need that money for a car repair or whatever. So, the only way we can afford such a device is to do the low cost per month--forever, but it keeps the hundreds of dollars free to pay for the car repair or unexpected plumbing bill. That's what life is like for those who are not as affluent as some on this forum, and it is, for those with less financial resources the only way they can enjoy a DVR or a car or a house or a refrigerator or whatever expensive item.
Even businesses and some of the biggest companies do the same thing, especially when what matters more in placing value on a business is how much CASH they have on hand, it makes more sense to lease or rent or pay the low price every month or quarter and stash the cash for its books. Sorry, 'nuf said
I like being on the cutting edge of technology. I paid $1000 for my first RCA VHS VCR and I am lower middle class in income. I had a 12 foot dish, when HBO etc were free to watch and not scrambled. Football games did not have commercials added and you just watched to announcer's chatting or planning what they were going to say when the came back on the air. Life has changed!
Where DiSH went wrong, imo, was in failing to differentiate and sell themselves as full/superior customer servicers. They initially came out saying they were going to be the anti-cable and actually care about service, but quickly devolved into maximizing activations with little or no service support, through direct-selling "around" dealers in subs' own areas, recruiting formerly full-serving C-band dealers to simply sell and not care, and indeed to recruit new sellers with no satellite knowledge at all, simply to garner receiver activations.
Their reputation was then on the downslide, the public started valuing satellite less and, perhaps in exchange, demanding "free, free, free," given that they weren't likely going to be getting that much of a service experience. This also helped to skew them downmarket and toward sketchier customers. Their response to this spiral was of course to blame us, the real dealers, and start in with all of their economic punishments.
Their reputation was then on the downslide, the public started valuing satellite less and, perhaps in exchange, demanding "free, free, free," given that they weren't likely going to be getting that much of a service experience. This also helped to skew them downmarket and toward sketchier customers. Their response to this spiral was of course to blame us, the real dealers, and start in with all of their economic punishments.
I think they lost sight of their core values. When DBS was in its infancy, I remember Charlie and one of his partners went on the Catholic cable channel EWTN to talk about how they were going to fill a niche for religious programming for people who couldn't otherwise get it across the nation. I thought that was really awesome. They were going to do something that nobody else was doing.
As you say, over the years it just seemed to become a money grab, as so many corporations are, although I will say they (Dish) did take good care of me as long as I was a customer. Same for my parents and their account.
PS- I LOVED the Dishplayer. Still one of the most innovative receivers of it's time.
Similar threads
