TiVo is rolling out a feature to its Chicago area viewers where they will be automatically able to record Chicago Tribune TV critic Maureen Ryan's picks. As a result of doing this blog I have become a regular reader of Ms. Ryan's column The Watcher and I really enjoy her work. The New York Times piece linked above by our friend Brian Stelter quotes the managing editor for features at The Tribune, James Warren, saying that the TiVo partnership seemed like a no-lose proposition.
"Maybe we'll get a few people to do the unthinkable and subscribe to the newspaper," said Warren.
I agree it's a no-lose proposition. While The Tribune would have gotten more exposure cutting a deal with the local cable company, this is one area where TiVo actually has an advantage. It can fairly easily add something like this where others can't.
I'd put the chances of the Comcast DVR rolling out something similar with San Francisco Chronicle TV critic Tim Goodman (who I also regularly read) at almost zero any time in the next two years. So The Chronicle, like the Tribune is probably better off going the TiVo route. Chicago area TiVo users will also get access to videos from Ms. Ryan discussing her picks.
But the marketing prowess of TiVo, the incredibly shrinking DVR company that on a net basis has lost, not gained subscribers four quarters running is quite impressive. It has all the buzz even if 4 out of 5 DVR homes are not actually subscribed to TiVo. And you TiVo lovers, I don't want to hear it from you any more than I want to hear it from the Gossip Girl zealots.
I know you love your TiVo, I know you think it's the best DVR ever and worth whatever you're paying for it. I know you think that anyone who uses a DVR that isn't a TiVo is missing out. I know that you and all your friends and everyone you know also uses TiVo and would consider using nothing else. But nonetheless, 4 out of 5 DVR homes aren't like yours. Sorry.
I love TiVo too, promise. And if it weren't more than mildly creepy for me to say "I love Gossip Girl," I'd probably say it. But I have to give props to TiVo and the Gossip Girl branch of CW marketing. They put spells on the mainstream media where it works out that even though they in no way could be considered "market leaders", the mainstream media laps ‘em up like melted Ben & Jerry's chocolate chip cookie dough.
I think many people have a tough time separating the fact that while TiVo makes a great product, it’s a terrible business model.
Oh, and the idea that 1 in 5 DVRs in the US is a TiVo is a bit outdated. It’s at least 1 in 6 and perhaps closer to 1 in 7.
But boy, do they have great PR.
Having written the TiVo is a bad business model piece at least 10 times since the blog started (a couple of examples:
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2007/10/25/i-love-tivo-its-still-not-a-good-business/1458
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2007/09/08/tivo-getting-its-groove-back-zero-percent-chance/574 ) I didn’t think more was necessary
BTW, if you have the data, please update this chart:
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2007/09/11/dvr-installed-base-august-2007/619
I look forward to the day when those 6 out of 7 DVR operators are paying licensing fees to TiVo.
I generally like the more “underground” critics, I guess, who focus on specific shows rather than recommending a whole slew (none of which are watched very closely). They seem to put a little more thought into their reviews.
I usually enjoy BuddyTV reviews, especially their regular Supernatural columnist. In three seasons I have almost never disagreed with his assessments.
Chris,
# of dish DVRs isn't all that big, really. So no, I don't think things would be much different. I think if TiVo ever gets the cash from the lawsuit, it's nice for TiVo but doesn't really change the impact on the business model.
Comcast is in deals with TiVo (they aren't producing good TiVo on Comcast boxes yet, but still), but I believe this isn't good for TiVo. Comcast sits back, gives its DVR away, charges a lower monthly fee than TiVo and sits back and waits until it can acquire TiVo on the cheap.
Competing with “free” is a dopey business to be in. Being in the licensing/IP business is a fine business for it to be in, but TiVo's desire to be in the hardware and service business is a bad business to be in.
If you're going to make statements about how TiVo's business model doesn't work, how about covering the full story?
Any business model is tough when patented technology is stolen and as a result a company is forced to make cut-rate deals until the courts finally get around to enforcing the patent.
But DISH will be forced to pay hundreds of millions to TiVo soon and those other 4 to 6 DVRs that Bill mentions will soon be paying some sort of licensing fee to TiVo. How's that for a business model? Ask Qualcomm how it's working for them.
Lost in all the hubbub about this announcement is that TiVo tried the same kind of thing a coupla years ago with Entertainment Weekly magazine. I know cuz I tried to use the feature where you could automatically record their editors picks. The thing never worked (or died aborning).
By the way, I have a TiVo and a cable company DVR. Despite what the TiVo cult says, the cable company DVR is better (at least my Scientific Atlanta is better than my TiVo Series 2 machine, which represents most of the TiVo boxes in service). Bottom line, while watching a recorded show off the TiVo hard drive, you can't do anything else, like see what else is on or program the damn thing – -even a $40 VCR can do that!).
Chris, based on the Comcast experiments in Mass, the jury is still out on how worthwhile straight licensing will be, but as far as intellectual property, the DISH lawsuit, etc — sure, that's a business we like and have said so. It's being in the hardware business and competing with “FREE” and then charging a higher monthly service charge than the cable companies for the programming guide that we think is the bad business model.
I live in Chicago and I wouldn't choose to subscribe to MR's picks for all the tea in China. I've never agreed with ANY of her critics on shows. Even if we're watching the same thing, I'm not a fan of her interpretations. I also think she's prone to being a viewing sheep.
Oh, and I had TiVo, and the freaking thing never worked properly. It never automatically adjusted when shows started late or ran late. My RCN DVR does.
Angie: send me three people you do agree with. Or even one. I'll check them out
I rarely “mostly” agree with anyone (ask Bill!), I'm probably more in-line in my viewing habits with Tim Goodman's picks than Mo Ryan's, but I like seeing the diversity of opinion and especially for the purposes of this blog it is useful to soak in all the diverse opinions.
Robert, do you believe things would have worked out differently for TiVo and their business model if DISH hadn't stolen their IP? I do. It's easy for people like you to trash their business model but how about trashing DISH for the harm they caused TiVo?
DISH wouldn't have had to license the software like DTV, but if DISH had licensed the patents in the early 2000's, I believe DTV would have continued their work with TiVo to this day. Instead, with DISH developing DVRs in complete disregard of patents, DTV, under new ownership felt comfortable enough to drop TiVo.
And all those generic DVR manufacturers/providers? Why bother licensing IP when DISH is getting away with it.
So in hindsight, with DISH stealing what they did, yes, TiVo's business model didn't play out and all the TiVo naysayers can have a field day with the way things have turned out.
But if DISH had licensed the IP and/or the Courts hadn't allowed DISH years to play this out, years ago TiVo would have been able to:
a) generate revenue from every DVR out there
b) develop more partnerships like the one with DTV where TiVo-lite service was offered
c) use the cash from a and b to successfully market the full-service standalone box.
See how long your business stays around when a big company steals what you offer, sells it for less and forces you to spend millions over 4 years trying to set things right.
Only after DISH is forced to pay hundreds of millions to TiVo and TiVo can use their Court-tested IP to bring others to the table, will we then see what TiVo's business model is worth.
I generally like the more “underground” critics, I guess, who focus on specific shows rather than recommending a whole slew (none of which are watched very closely). They seem to put a little more thought into their reviews.
I usually enjoy BuddyTV reviews, especially their regular Supernatural columnist. In three seasons I have almost never disagreed with his assessments.
Chris,
# of dish DVRs isn't all that big, really. So no, I don't think things would be much different. I think if TiVo ever gets the cash from the lawsuit, it's nice for TiVo but doesn't really change the impact on the business model.
Comcast is in deals with TiVo (they aren't producing good TiVo on Comcast boxes yet, but still), but I believe this isn't good for TiVo. Comcast sits back, gives its DVR away, charges a lower monthly fee than TiVo and sits back and waits until it can acquire TiVo on the cheap.
Competing with “free” is a dopey business to be in. Being in the licensing/IP business is a fine business for it to be in, but TiVo's desire to be in the hardware and service business is a bad business to be in.