# PVR Study Highlights Cable, Satellite Potential



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

In an effort to revitalize the market opportunities and household penetration of PVR services, companies are now focused on building the PVR platform through cable and satellite operators using an array of different client and server-based approaches.

Research findings from the report show that through 2005, U.S. household penetration of PVR services will experience average year-to-year growth of 150 percent, reaching 36.1 million homes by the end of 2005. Leading the market's household expansion will be the rollout by cable operators of new integrated cable-delivered PVR platforms and services from companies such as Motorola, Scientific-Atlanta, Digeo, Keen Personal Media, Concurrent Computer and SeaChange International, which are projected to reach 20.3 million cable households by the end of 2005.

Conversely, the research has found that throughout the forecast period, U.S. household penetration of integrated DBS-delivered PVR services from providers DirecTV and EchoStar will grow at a much slower rate when compared to U.S. household penetration of integrated cable-delivered PVR services.

According to TRACE, the highest household penetration growth rates of PVR services will come from five cable operators; Adelphia, Charter, Comcast, Cox, and Time Warner Cable. By the end of 2005, these five cable operators will collectively provide integrated cable-delivered PVR services to 76 percent of cable households, while at the same time take household share away from both DBS-delivered PVR service providers and stand-alone PVR service providers.

As a result, the U.S. household share of DBS-delivered PVR services will decline from 70 percent in 2001 to 41 percent in 2005. Furthermore, U.S. household penetration of stand-alone PVR services from providers TiVo and SONICblue will grow at a modest rate of 38 percent through 2005, but account for 3 percent of households receiving PVR services.

From SkyRetailer (Used with Permission)


----------



## dtcarson (Jan 10, 2003)

Hmm....could the differing rates in growth be attributed to the advertising practices of the various industries? When I got Dish, I knew I was interested in PVR, but most of the info I got, I got from this website--your average Joe SixChannel isn't going to use this source. It doesn't seem like Dish or DTV really push the PVR that much; whereas my local cable company is really pushing their 'InDemand' and 'IControl' which I guess are their VOD and PVR features. 
One thing I liked about Dish vs. DTV was that Dish had their own PVR units, whereas DTV had offsite references to a couple other companies. [that made it more appealing to this newbie, I didn't know where to start looking re: hardware.] I assume the cable company, in keeping with their pseudomonopolistic practices, are leasing/selling their receivers through their own companies.
And I don't know much about the subscription patterns/growth of satellite vs. cable, but could this also be a case of '[most of] those who want it, already have it?' Cable has always been the 'default' for most people I know; plus, a lot of people either have families with more than 3 people, or households with more than 3 tv's, and that extra 5/month/reciever does add up, even if it is a PVR...
On my part, I talk up the PVR whenever I talk to someone about tv. I love it 

edit: Man, I dragged this one up from the dead. Sorry about that.


----------



## HarryD (Mar 24, 2002)

Doesn't cable have an extra outlet fee. I think I'm paying $3.00 now.. 

I had a PVR (first a Dishplayer, then a Tivo, and now an Ultimate TV) for about 3 1/2 years now.
I remember the first time my brother-in-law saw me pause 'live TV'. His jaw dropped to the floor.. he said 'What did you just do'?? When I tried to explain it to him (he's not a tech by any means), he looked at me like I had three heads.. I finally told him..'I can stop time'


----------



## JBKing (Mar 23, 2002)

Usually additional analog connections are free, but there is a charge if you go digital and need an additional box.


----------



## dtcarson (Jan 10, 2003)

HarryD said:


> Doesn't cable have an extra outlet fee. I think I'm paying $3.00 now..
> 
> I had a PVR (first a Dishplayer, then a Tivo, and now an Ultimate TV) for about 3 1/2 years now.
> I remember the first time my brother-in-law saw me pause 'live TV'. His jaw dropped to the floor.. he said 'What did you just do'?? When I tried to explain it to him (he's not a tech by any means), he looked at me like I had three heads.. I finally told him..'I can stop time'


*laugh* As long as your Magic Wand has good batteries ; )

Our cable company is the same, you can run as many analog splits as you want, but each digital connection needs a box, and you'll want a remote, each of which are additional rental. So if you're only on analog, the add'l reciever fee is a sticking point, but if you want digital across the board, it's the same situation.
"Digital Service on Additional Outlets (Each" 1.00
"Digital Converter (Each)" 6.60 [not sure if it's required to get digital service
Digital Video Recorder $9.95 per outlet
Universal Remote Control $0.35
You get one digital converter and one remote with digital service. 
It does say "Terminal required for Digital and Premium Services." I assume that means the box. So their mirror fee is 6.60 vs 4.99 for Dish.


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

Many people do not know what a PVR is, but I believe that if you put a PVR in someone home for 2 weeks they will never ever want to give it back (and this is no matter who makes the PVR)

My wife did not want a PVR, I got one now she cant watch TV without it.


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

I agree with Scott, once you use it, you start liking it, and want to keep it. This is a good way for cable to gain some ground again but the extra charges for those receivers will end up costing the customers extra but when you figure Tivo charges $10-$13 per receiver you have (unless you have DirecTv) then that makes up for it.

Satellite will have to go another step ahead if they want to keep and gain more customers instead of losing some to cable because of this new technology. If most of the cable subscribers are going to have these pvr receivers then satellite better think of something themselves. It may require more cost per sub as a result. If they make the receivers in bulk then it should cost them a lot less to build.


----------



## EvanS (Mar 27, 2002)

Scott Greczkowski said:


> ...My wife did not want a PVR, I got one now she cant watch TV without it...


I second that Scott!!
When the 501 came out I signed with Dish - 1st experience with sat or PVR. Wife was reluctant at first, started to love it, didn't even whimper when I ordered the 721 and NOW I am almost under threat of death to make sure I get SOME sort of HD-PVR!!!

sheesh...created a monster :eek2:


----------



## Bardman (Apr 23, 2002)

I third that, Scott!!

When I was with Dish, I got a 501 when they dropped to $199. Wife threatened me with bodily harm if I spend that much again on the TV. We moved and hence lost our grandfathered East & West Nets so now have 2 HDVR2s with Directv (they have locals here) and now she complains why I can't hook the two together 'cause the shows she wants to watch are on the Family Room Tivo and she's in the Bedroom (we need HMO... I've already got the CAT5 run).

What's worse is my kids... on vacation last week at my parents house (Dish 4900), my 5 year old son kept trying to rewind and pause. Meanwhile, my 2 year old daughter brings me the remote and says "Polie!!" (Rolie Polie Olie)

I need my own receiver!!!


----------



## toad57 (Apr 23, 2002)

Bardman said:


> ...and now she complains why I can't hook the two together 'cause the shows she wants to watch are on the Family Room Tivo and she's in the Bedroom


Sounds like the upcoming Dish PVR 522 _might_ do that trick... if it will let users playback (share) recorded shows from either remote.


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

The 522 sounds like it is going to be a pretty good receiver, especially if it were to get the 721 Linux software. Why not name it the 722 instead of the 522 if it has Linux? Because of no internet capability? The 522 is going to look an aweful lot like the 721's box style.


----------

