# Will you pay for EHD activation? If not, why? (Take III)



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

(Inspired by discusson in the now closed $39.99 External HD Activation Fee - Just say 'no' thread.)

Will you, or have you already, pay to activate an external hard drive?

If you have said "no" to the EHD fee, why and what would change your mind?

This poll is open to everyone, and includes options suggested in the previous poll which was targeted only at those who said No.

_Moderator Note: This thread was cloned from a thread BobaBird created so a poll can be added._


----------



## dfergie (Feb 28, 2003)

Paid it and have 1 drive and 2/3rds of another 320 gig drive full...


----------



## dld542004 (Jun 18, 2006)

dfergie said:


> Paid it and have 1 drive and 2/3rds of another 320 gig drive full...


Paid it and very happy with it!


----------



## SMosher (Jan 16, 2006)

Why pay another fee? 
I already get popped for the DVR fee on 2 625s, 1 510 and my 622.

Fee fee fee fee. Feel like I'm dealing with a bank sometimes.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

No and at the risk of inciting a riot I'll keep my reasons to myself 

-JB


----------



## dbconsultant (Sep 13, 2005)

At 19.99 (or lower), I wouldn't hesitate. I may still pay 39.99 in the future if I find that my viewing can't keep up with the internal drive filling up. Most of our timers now are HD programs (except for the movies we record from TCM) so this may happen.


----------



## moman19 (Oct 22, 2004)

$19.99 seems fair. $29.99 maybe. $39.99 just seems steep. Plus I doubt I'll need to tie up the Support lines with questions.


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

Aren't we being a little futile here.

It costs $39.99.

Take it or leave it.

Why must we rehash history over and over again.


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

The intent of the poll is to gauge how many said Yes (take it) and, for those who said No (leave it), why?

You are free to not discuss. This is a good point to rehash what I requested in my failed attempt to put up this poll:

- no need to discuss what the fee is for or how much you don't like it, that's already in the original thread
- do NOT discuss other fees in this thread (appreciate the restraint already shown)
- suggested discussion is the effect of the fee on Dish's efforts to reduce churn
- the poll itself is also open for discussion


----------



## brettbolt (Feb 22, 2006)

BobaBird said:


> ...
> - suggested discussion is the effect of the fee on Dish's efforts to reduce churn


I just said 'no'.  (in protest of the fee). However, I have been a Dish customer since 1997 and do not plan to churn. I think its still a better deal than cable. And I am happy with the recent bug fixes to the pause and skip functions, etc.


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

Results after 2 weeks:

49% have paid or will pay $40
33% won't activate unless there is no fee
13% would for a reduced fee, most of those not until it drops to $10
5% won't get it at all (I'm thinking this number is _way_ to low, given that the only people who saw the poll are those who care about how the box works, i.e. us)

So for every 3 who pay, there are 2 others who would use EHD only if there were no extra cost. Add in those willing to pay a lesser amount and the numbers are almost even.

brettbolt is going to stick around anyway, so Dish is safe there . Of those interested in EHD, nearly half are turning it down because of the fee. If you were Dish, would it be worth the development cost to provide a feature that will keep subscribers tied to you ($40 vs $600+ SAC), or to collect a fee and reduce churn for only half the users?


----------



## bairdjc (Sep 22, 2005)

no - because the amount of memory already in the system suits my needs just fine. What the hell do all you people do with all that space? do you recrd stuff then NEVER delete it?


----------



## treiher (Oct 24, 2002)

bairdjc said:


> no - because the amount of memory already in the system suits my needs just fine. What the hell do all you people do with all that space? do you recrd stuff then NEVER delete it?


OK, I'll take a stab at this one . . . I did pay the $39 activation fee and bought an external hard drive, and here's my thinking . . .

I've been considering buying an HD DVD player. But the whole Blue Ray vs. HD-DVD war had me frustrated. I didn't like the idea of buying one format over the other, only to be shut out of an entire group of movies because so many are exclusive to one format or the either. Sure, you can get the LG dual version, but that's a cool $1000!

So then I think, why not spend a $120 for a 500GB external hard drive, pay the fee, and start recording HD movies? If you have the premium channels, its amazing how many HD movies you can record in a fairly short time, which take the place of DVD's I might have purchased. Now with Dish HD PPV, I have more choices, and the fee is still less than buying a DVD or still comparable to renting one. Overall, I'm in this for a lot less than a DVD player. If I fill up one hard drive, I can buy another. I view this as a bit of short term solution for me. Eventually the HD DVD thing will get sorted out, and maybe I'll look at again later, but for now, that's my plan.

I know, I know, some of the HD programming is HD Lite. I don't have access to all the movies right away, but over time, I bet I can record most of them. And even HD Lite is quite a bit better than standard def. DVD's. Also, the hard drive could die, I run the risk of losing the programs, and so on. But I've spent a lot less money in the meantime, even with the $39 activation fee and the cost of the hard drive.

So yeah! I'm recording stuff and not deleting it. I agree, if you don't take that approach, it doesn't make much sense. So that's what the hell I'm doing with it.  Makes sense to me.


----------



## dfergie (Feb 28, 2003)

treiher said:


> OK, I'll take a stab at this one . . . I did pay the $39 activation fee and bought an external hard drive, and here's my thinking . . .
> 
> I've been considering buying an HD DVD player. But the whole Blue Ray vs. HD-DVD war had me frustrated. I didn't like the idea of buying one format over the other, only to be shut out of an entire group of movies because so many are exclusive to one format or the either. Sure, you can get the LG dual version, but that's a cool $1000!
> 
> ...


There you go... I have a HD DVD player, but with the HDD archiving will probably not get Blu-Ray as I am like you... archiving and happy  Wild Hogs comes up in a week on PPV


----------



## Bista-Buster (Apr 15, 2006)

I'm not a Dish customer but I voted no fee based on "Why must I pay 40 bucks to save my recordings?

My real question is why are we paying this fee in the first place?


----------



## brettbolt (Feb 22, 2006)

Bista-Buster said:


> I'm not a Dish customer but I voted no fee based on "Why must I pay 40 bucks to save my recordings?
> 
> My real question is why are we paying this fee in the first place?


I voted no, and also started a thread here protesting the fee.

However, it seems that about 50% of the people responding here are OK with the fee.

The real simple answer to your question is that Dish CAN charge the fee if they want, so they did. They are in business to make money, and they've probably made quite a bundle with this enhancement. Many people here have waited a long time for this feature and really love it.

But I think Dish is being short sighted. They get short term gain from 1/2 of their customers, but the other 1/2 of them are not so happy with the fee. If the resulting 'customer churn' increases then it might turn out to be a bad decision for Dish.


----------



## Hunter Green (May 8, 2006)

Functionality costs money to develop and support. There's two ways for the people who developed it to recoup that cost.

First, they could force everyone to pay for it by increasing their baseline costs, regardless of whether they will actually use it or benefit from it. The advantage here is that they can just say "due to cost increases, we're forced to raise our rates" without specifying which things you're paying for, so you won't know which things you're paying for and not getting. That way, you can have the illusion that you're not paying for stuff when you actually are.

Second, they could offer you a choice. Pay for the functionality you use, or don't pay for it if you don't want to use it. It's up to you.

If you take this forum seriously, you'll be forced to conclude the second option is actually the terrible, unjustifiable evil. Thank heaven nearly everything in the past was done using the first option. And given the feedback DISH is getting, probably everything in the future will be, too. Hooray!


----------



## brettbolt (Feb 22, 2006)

Hunter Green said:


> Functionality costs money to develop and support. There's two ways for the people who developed it to recoup that cost.
> 
> First, they could force everyone to pay for it by increasing their baseline costs .......
> 
> ...


There's no question that it cost them development money to implement this feature.

I agree that its better to charge 1/2 the people $40 than to charge everyone $20 to recoup the cost.

Now if we could only do the same with the channel packages -- only pay for the specific channels we watch. That would be ideal. Right now only the AT250 package has the few channels that my family actually watches. We are all subsidizing the rest of the channels.


----------



## kckucera (Aug 1, 2005)

Yup paid it, have more than half filled my 500G and when full will use a second drive. I really like the ability to archive favorite movies.


----------



## HDlover (Jul 28, 2006)

I'm going to Comcast (still no fsn-hd). Free D-VHS archiving not tied to Comcast. This is good but doesn't go all the way. It's more for E* than us.


----------



## ssmith10pn (Jul 6, 2005)

> Wild Hogs comes up in a week on PPV


Bought it last weekend on Blu-Ray but haven't had a chance to watch it.


----------



## Kricket (Nov 18, 2005)

i wont pay to use it because i dont see the point of charging for it in the first place - it just seems to be a way to make e* PURE profit - i mean, they literally do NOTHING but flip a switch and then charge $40 for it?

i mean, if they had to send a tech out to install something, then i'd understand - but people have to go out and buy an external hard drive (costing them money) - and then install it themselves - THEN they have to call e* up to use what theyve already paid for? seems silly to me...

its like buying an hdtv - and then only being able to use 2 out of 3 available inputs - will the tv still work? sure - but if you want to use it to its full intended potential - you have to pay more? no, thanks...

EDIT - re-reading my post - it may seem that im bashing the people who paid for the activation - that wasnt my intention - whats "silly" is e* charging for it - i understand some people need that extra space and, unfortunately, their only course of action is to pay $40 - that just stinks...


----------



## Hunter Green (May 8, 2006)

By that reasoning, why pay for groceries? All they do is put it in your bag. If they even do that, in some places you have to bag your own.


----------



## Kricket (Nov 18, 2005)

Hunter Green said:


> By that reasoning, why pay for groceries? All they do is put it in your bag. If they even do that, in some places you have to bag your own.


??? that doesnt make any sense

by purchasing groceries - im purchasing products - much like purchasing a hard drive

the correct analogy would be that i bought milk and cereal - and then was charged AGAIN to put my milk into my bowl of cereal


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

The TV analogy doesn’t work either. When you buy the TV you know the inputs will work. When you bought the E* equipment you knew it didn’t support EHD. They are offering an added value that you knew you didn’t have before.


----------



## Kricket (Nov 18, 2005)

HobbyTalk said:


> The TV analogy doesn't work either. When you buy the TV you know the inputs will work. When you bought the E* equipment you knew it didn't support EHD. They are offering an added value that you knew you didn't have before.


the point is that the usb input was DESIGNED to work - dish disabled this feature SPECIFICALLY to make more money - so yes, the tv analogy works perfectly - the manufacturer designed something that a THIRD party disabled

EDIT - its sad that people think were getting an "added" feature - we're just now able to use our boxes the way they were SUPPOSED to work in the first place - yes, we knew that dish disabled the feature - but that still doesnt mean that were "gaining" a feature - we're just able to use something that was withheld from us in the first place


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

Can you point me to the article or other information that shows E* disabled the USB to make more money?


----------



## Kricket (Nov 18, 2005)

HobbyTalk said:


> Can you point me to the article or other information that shows E* disabled the USB to make more money?


:lol: - and i actually laughed out loud when i read that

no - they disabled it for some "other" reason


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Kricket said:


> the point is that the usb input was DESIGNED to work - dish disabled this feature SPECIFICALLY to make more money - so yes, the tv analogy works perfectly - the manufacturer designed something that a THIRD party disabled
> 
> EDIT - its sad that people think were getting an "added" feature - we're just now able to use our boxes the way they were SUPPOSED to work in the first place - yes, we knew that dish disabled the feature - but that still doesnt mean that were "gaining" a feature - we're just able to use something that was withheld from us in the first place


Sorry Kricket.. but this is totally false. Dish never disabled it. Archival support is a lot different than USB support. Dish had USB support wtih Cameras at launch and the another dish device too.

There is software that goes with the management of this feature both in terms of activation (DRM) and it terms of managing the content on it. IT was not just a matter of flipping a switch and yes a feature was added not withheld. USB port != Archival support in my opinion.

I have no problem with people feeling the price for activation is not warrented, but I do when I read the post above that simplifies what obviously was a decent amount of engineering effort. Sorry I totally disagree with your take on this. A feature was added not just hiddend and exposed.


----------



## Kricket (Nov 18, 2005)

we'll have to agree to disagree on that point

the cameras and pmp functions, imo, were always secondary functions to the ability to add external hd space when it comes to the usb port - im willing to bet that the designers of the actual box had external hd support in mind as a first function of the usb port

the drm'ing of content is a whole other ball of wax - i dont consider it a "feature" that i cant do what i want with content i record myself

the "decent amount of engineering" involved was there to limit the use of the box - without dish network firmware, boxes like these are made to natively support external hard drive support with no other software - i dont think the customer should have to pay to "undo" what dish worked so hard to do - and that is limit the box's functionality...


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

DRM was obviously a requirement in the eyes of Dish. Personally I don't like it either but obviously it was considered a must in providing this feature and therefore requirement work. 

As for not requiring software, you actually believe that the management of archived material was a built in function? Well you can believe what you want, but I don't see how it could be...


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

Kricket said:


> :lol: - and i actually laughed out loud when i read that


Really? I think that most are laughing at YOUR explaintion of this  Obviously this is something that is true in YOUR mind and you have nothing to back it up.

If E* only wanted to make money, they could have done it a number of different ways. It could have only been available in the 722 and you'd have to pay $199 to upgrade (the Intel/AMD way of business with crippled CPUs)... they could have charged $5 per month (the cable way of doing business) or they could have made it work only with E* supplied hard drives at $200 a pop (the Apple way of business).

They way they did it was the most expensive way for them. Having to support 1000's of different makes and models of hard drives is, as we have already seen, an engineering and support nightmare.


----------



## whatchel1 (Jan 11, 2006)

I have it & glad of it. I use a 500 gb that is around half full right now. I will be able to move it to DVD's at my leisure. As far as E* having to DRM the device it was necessary to appease the providers. One doesn't bite the hand that feeds him.


----------



## brettbolt (Feb 22, 2006)

Kricket said:


> ... we're just now able to use our boxes the way they were SUPPOSED to work in the first place ...


Kricket, I agree with you that there was an expectation of future functionality that would be available from the USB port. We purchased (or leased) a product before it was fully implemented (and debugged!). We are dependent on Dish for bug fixes and to complete the implementation. We have always had free bug fixes and numerous feature additions at no charge - like split screen and others too numerous to mention.

Its great that they continue to improve the product. But the charge was unexpected and broke the tradition, and that is why many (including me) are upset. No one likes unexpected charges on their bill.

One of the problems with your argument is that you are posting them in a place that is, in my opinion, overwhelmed with people strongly biased in favor of Dish. I started a thread here protesting the fee shortly after it was announced. It was largely shot down (and eventually closed by the moderator). 
Brett


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

Why can't people seem to understand that most of us "lease" the 622 and 722 which means that we are renting the box from Dish.

Charging me a monthly fee (on top of the total BS DVR fee!) comes to $12 a month to rent so I fully expect "all" the features of the 622 ad 722 to work for me because I am paying Dish $144 a year to rent a box. After two years the rental fee is pure profit (might even be less depending on what Dish pays for their own box) so to add even 1 penny to turn on a feature is BS!

Now if Dish wants to charge people who bought their box a few bucks then I'm fine with that as long as the feature was not on the box when they bought it.

I agree with the above poster that the feature came with the box from day one but Dish turned it off until they could modify it so that we could only use the backups with their own boxes.

-JB


----------



## Hunter Green (May 8, 2006)

It all comes down to the question of whether external USB HD software was part of the original product or not.

Fortunately, delusions aside, the answer to this is clear. It was not. It was not listed on any features list. The only argument anyone can make to say it was is "It so was!" followed by sticking their fingers in their ears and humming real loud.

With this fact in hand, it comes back down to the question of whether a product is worth paying for. Software, contrary to a lot of people's strange impressions, does not create or maintain itself. Supporting external USB storage wasn't a matter of changing a variable somewhere; it required coders to spend many hours on it. Every tiny detail of it you can see had to be created by someone, and for every one you can see, there's ten more you can't, which are equally important. Is it worth the cost to you? Maybe, maybe not. Aren't you glad this time you got that choice?

Or maybe it's better to make up some delusion that this was on the feature lists, so you can preserve the illusion that you're not paying for all the other features you aren't using. All this reality stuff is a real downer.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Hunter that is exactly the point I was trying to make. We are talking about two separate things here. They might be related but they are separate in my eyes. 

The first one is having to do with effort to provide the feature. This is the one I took exception to being a software engineer myself. I am always amazed at how some trivialize the effort it takes to productize a feature. 

I was once told... It will take you that long... Jeeze it is only a button. The person was a low level guy whose idea of build a System Management system was a web server and a set of CGI scripts. He obviously did not have a clue of the scope and quickly trivialized the effort. 

The 2nd point is really what this thread is about. I understand jrb351s and Brettbolts points and their position. It basically comes down to are you willing to pay. If enough people feel it is not worth the price, the feature will either go unused or the fee will drop or be removed.

Also.. the thread Brett is referring to was closed down because people were not playing nicely.. Lets keep things constructive here so this thread does not suffer the same fate. I personally feel this topic deserves discussion so lets respects each others views and stick to the topic.


----------



## DoyleS (Oct 21, 2002)

Its really a nice feature. You can easily move shows off of the main drive to the external and that along with the group feature gives a very nice archiving of shows. It would have been nice for it to be a no charge feature but now with all of the new fall shows starting up, I often have 2 and even 3 timers firing during the same time periods as I evaluate new shows and catch my regulars. I really don't worry about network competition anymore. I have no regrets for paying the one time $40 fee. The 622 is in my opinion the best receiver Dish has come out with and the external hard drive option makes it just that much better. 
I find it interesting in the Poll data that 40% of the people paid for and enabled the feature and another 48% as of this note would like the feature but don't want to pay for it. My service station guy called this morning and my full tuneup on the Burb will be just over $500 with parts and labor. This External hard drive feature is in the noise compared to that. 

..Doyle


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

:backtotop

- no need to discuss what the fee is for
(but thanks to Ron, Hunter and others for addressing this sidetrack)

- suggested discussion is the effect of the fee on Dish's efforts to reduce churn

Responder count for the poll is up to 176, and the take rate for activation has fallen to just under 40%. I believe that customers with archives tied to Dish equipment are more likely to remain Dish customers than those who don't. 47% are willing to bind themselves in this way but will not due to the (too high) fee. Would Dish be better off investing in keeping 87% of their customers, or getting a fee from 40% but doing nothing extra to retain the other 47%?


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

To answer the question BobaBird, one would have to know what the churn is of the % of people that would not jump ship because of the content the EHD is holding. (65K question) Then compare that potential review to the review created by the fee. 

If it truly does provide a strong lock strategy then long term thinking would dictate making such a feature free but if people see it more as a short term extended storage then lock in would be less strong and the argument not as appealing. 

What does not surprise me that most either are willing to pay or not pay the fee no matter what. The gray area in between is small so I would say either offer it or don't and then it becomes a question you propose BobaBird. I see it as secondary extended storage and it would not be a lock in for me, but I know others that are using this feature more heavily and it definitely make the person think more than twice about leaving.


----------



## DoyleS (Oct 21, 2002)

I would not consider the EHD a lock feature for me. On the whole, Dish provides a good receiver with minimal problems and has done a good job at increasing HD content. Comcast is a last resort for me. The desire to go to Direct just isn't there. The biggest lock feature I see is Directs NFL ticket. Those people are locked. I am not a big sports fan and wouldn't subscribe to the NFL ticket even if Dish had it. 

..Doyle


----------



## brettbolt (Feb 22, 2006)

BobaBird said:


> ...
> - suggested discussion is the effect of the fee on Dish's efforts to reduce churn
> 
> Responder count for the poll is up to 176, and the take rate for activation has fallen to just under 40%. I believe that customers with archives tied to Dish equipment are more likely to remain Dish customers than those who don't. 47% are willing to bind themselves in this way but will not due to the (too high) fee. Would Dish be better off investing in keeping 87% of their customers, or getting a fee from 40% but doing nothing extra to retain the other 47%?


BobaBird, if we sat in E*'s company board room I think we could use this argument to have Charlie eliminate the fee entirely. He seems like a reasonable person on the Charlie Chat. Here are three things I would tell him:

1) Assuming that most 622/722 customers lease their receivers instead of owning, Dish's hold on them is much weaker without having an archive of recorded material.

2) Now factor in the fact that D* launched a new bird and promises to surpass E*'s HD capacity by the year's end. You would think that Charlie would do everything he could to retain his 622 customers. Its getting very tempting to give the competition a try.

3) Every customer who leased a 622 within a few months of their release (early 2006) now has an expired or soon to expire 18 month lease contract.

Given these three factors, I think its clear that they made a poor choice with the new fee -- its not in their own best interest.


----------



## TBoneit (Jul 27, 2006)

My suspicion is that even if EHD service were free many would not pay the price for the EHD itself.


----------



## redbird (May 9, 2005)

I paid because my one of my 622's HDMI port died. I called and they are sending another one, it will be here tomorrow and I'll still have my recordings. I figure I'll be with Dish for years so the monthly cost to Dish is less than a dollar and with all the new HD, I'll need the extra space.


----------



## DoyleS (Oct 21, 2002)

I think you might find the high number of lockups reported on the HR20 over in the D* forum a little more frustrating than not having access to the USB for free. I am confident D* will fix the issues as lockup problems are a real way to lose customers. The grass may be looking greener at D* (sure enough press about it) but until you are in that pasture you just can't tell for sure. 

..Doyle


----------

