# Why are DVRs so expensive?



## Xsabresx (Oct 8, 2007)

I am sure this had been explained probably numerous times here, but I havent found anything.

First, this is NOT a complaint thread. I understand it is what it is and I accept that as part of dealing with Directv. I am just curious.

Why are DVRs so expensive? Leasing is $199 and owning is several times more than that ($199 to own would make sense). Hasnt technology gotten to the point where these things cost next to nothing to build? There has to be a huge profit margin in them. Because they are proprietary it would seem to me at least that they would be cheap because you can only use them for one thing.

Anyway, like I said, this isnt a rant. Just curious.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

I think it's like every product...they're all cheap to make, but the seller wants money.


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

This is a great question that I can't seem to find an answer on. I don't understand the pricing structure behind the DVRs either but apparently DirecTV is getting many people to purchase them. I'm interested in knowing the answer on this as well.


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

sigma1914 said:


> I think it's like every product...they're all cheap to make, but the seller wants money.


If I recall correctly, you stated that a lot of time goes into researching and creating these products which is why DirecTV charges so much for them?


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

And it's not just cost of components, but the added costs. Of course some (I don't know if all) are covered by monthly fees, but since we only pay a per account fee, it's likely not everything. Things like licensing costs such as to Tivo, development cost for new functionality etc.


----------



## scsa1000 (Feb 11, 2011)

Great you never learn your lesson you got your thread deleted yet here you are starting up again. Tc I think sigma answered it best for you. Of course I miss out on dpeters answer which was good too. Tc listen to both sigma and dpeters.


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

dpeters11 said:


> And it's not just cost of components, but the added costs. Of course some (I don't know if all) are covered by monthly fees, but since we only pay a per account fee, it's likely not everything. Things like licensing costs such as to Tivo, development cost for new functionality etc.


Shouldn't those costs be associated with the DVR, HD and service related fees that are charged per month?


----------



## Xsabresx (Oct 8, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> I think it's like every product...they're all cheap to make, but the seller wants money.


But even that really makes no sense. Ok so I spend $199 to lease a receiver, and then I pay $6/$7 per month as a lease fee. Ok fine. They are getting their $199 plus their monthly fee. If they are owned why cant they be $199 to own and $6/$7 mirror fee like it was in the past?

I guess that is where I am lost.


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

Xsabresx said:


> But even that really makes no sense. Ok so I spend $199 to lease a receiver, and then I pay $6/$7 per month as a lease fee. Ok fine. They are getting their $199 plus their monthly fee. If they are owned why cant they be $199 to own and $6/$7 mirror fee like it was in the past?
> 
> I guess that is where I am lost.


Be careful, you're going to open a huge can of worms if you go down this path. There are some on here who don't like you question the almighty one that is DirecTV.


----------



## Xsabresx (Oct 8, 2007)

debell said:


> Be careful, you're going to open a huge can of worms if you go down this path. There are some on here who don't like you question the almighty one that is DirecTV.


There is a HUGE difference between "questioning" and "asking a question".

I am simply curious and it has no bearing on my outlook to Directv.

Please dont turn my thread into something it isnt. In fact I dont want to know bad enough to read more of your incessant bad mouthing


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

This is a really good subject, I love it when it comes up now and then.

The cost to produce the DVR isn't relevant as the 'leasing' price is what it is. Assume that you pay a $200 upfront for an HDDVR, now if you got that from D* directly, then you don't know which one you will get, whether it is new or 'refurbished' and whether it will be in great looking shape or suck pond scum. All that for the $200.

For new customers, and quite a few current customers, there is no upfront fee involved unless you want more than a couple of them.

Now to the 'lease fee'. First it isn't a lease fee, never was regardless of what it appears to be on paper. It is a 'because we can' or use fee if you will. There is exactly zero about that fee that makes it a lease, 'cause if it was actually that and you owned one, there wouldn't be a fee at all. But there is. The 'lease fee' automagically becomes the 'mirror fee' or 'additonal receiver fee' in the case of owned.

And Debell, no D* doesn't really get many to actually buy the receivers.


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

Xsabresx said:


> There is a HUGE difference between "questioning" and "asking a question".
> 
> I am simply curious and it has no bearing on my outlook to Directv.
> 
> Please dont turn my thread into something it isnt.


A difference between questioning and asking a question? That's interesting 

My point is that you are absolutely right: paying $199 for a reciever + $6/7 a month for the receiver is ridiculous. Those who support DTV on here think otherwise so you're not going to get anywhere with this question (as you can see from the first response in this thread).


----------



## scsa1000 (Feb 11, 2011)

Don't worry x the only one who is getting their agenda pushed is this person. I have seen you get answers to your question fairly hell sigma is answering you when sigma and I are big direct tv fans and his answer was great. Debel has an agenda which at least the mods are seeing what he is trying to do.


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

lparsons21 said:


> This is a really good subject, I love it when it comes up now and then.
> 
> The cost to produce the DVR isn't relevant as the 'leasing' price is what it is. Assume that you pay a $200 upfront for an HDDVR, now if you got that from D* directly, then you don't know which one you will get, whether it is new or 'refurbished' and whether it will be in great looking shape or suck pond scum. All that for the $200.
> 
> ...


So DirecTV calls it a lease fee but it's not a lease fee?


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

scsa1000 said:


> Don't worry x the only one who is getting their agenda pushed is this person. I have seen you get answers to your question fairly hell sigma is answering you when sigma and I are big direct tv fans and his answer was great. Debel has an agenda which at least the mods are seeing what he is trying to do.


So the answer is that sellers want to make money?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Xsabresx said:


> But even that really makes no sense. Ok so I spend $199 to lease a receiver, and then I pay $6/$7 per month as a lease fee. Ok fine. They are getting their $199 plus their monthly fee. If they are owned why cant they be $199 to own and $6/$7 mirror fee like it was in the past?
> 
> I guess that is where I am lost.


I think the costs are close to around $400/unit. Sure this may have profit in it too.
Broadcom and the other chip makers are taking their cut as these aren't used [in the same numbers] like cell phones, or computer chips.
The monthly fees aren't related to the cost/or recovery of it, but "merely" another revenue stream for DirecTV, just like the $3/month for MRV.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Just like Dish which is the only real direct comparison.


----------



## scsa1000 (Feb 11, 2011)

Very old it's a fact we need to live with hell Comcast cable boxes are 500 if you lose it or break it when you leave the same goes with these.


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

veryoldschool said:


> I think the costs are close to around $400/unit. Sure this may have profit in it too.
> Broadcom and the other chip makers are taking their cut as these aren't used [in the same numbers] like cell phones, or computer chips.
> The monthly fees aren't related to the cost/or recovery of it, but "merely" another revenue stream for DirecTV, just like the $3/month for MRV.


Since DirecTV reuses these receivers for several years and "resells" them at full price and doesn't guarantee you'll get a new model, they must be making a killing reselling used equipment to customers at "new equipment" pricing! :lol:


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Xsabresx said:


> But even that really makes no sense. Ok so I spend $199 to lease a receiver, and then I pay $6/$7 per month as a lease fee. Ok fine. They are getting their $199 plus their monthly fee. If they are owned why cant they be $199 to own and $6/$7 mirror fee like it was in the past?
> 
> I guess that is where I am lost.


Because some are given away for free or less than $199. It's capitalism...make as much money as possible and sustain it. Listen to what Mark Cuban says...CEOs are trying to increase their portfolio. In the case of DirecTV, DVR fees help do that.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

debell said:


> Shouldn't those costs be associated with the DVR, HD and service related fees that are charged per month?


I just don't know if all of them are. Of course usually you can get one DVR free as a new customer. I don't know if it's part of the acquisition costs etc.

But I know I'd rather pay the $200 up front then have a per account $7 a month than to pay a DVR fee on each box. I believe I've seen some cable providers charge up to almost $20 per DVR.


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

scsa1000 said:


> Very old it's a fact we need to live with hell Comcast cable boxes are 500 if you lose it or break it when you leave the same goes with these.


Your lack of punctuation makes your posts difficult to understand.

I don't know about Comcast, but with BHN you pay nothing for the receiver up front and you can schedule a technician to come and pick them up if you cancel or return to the local office. It doesn't get any easier than that


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

dpeters11 said:


> I just don't know if all of them are. Of course usually you can get one DVR free as a new customer. I don't know if it's part of the acquisition costs etc.
> 
> But I know I'd rather pay the $200 up front then have a per account $7 a month than to pay a DVR fee on each box. I believe I've seen some cable providers charge up to almost $20 per DVR.


If you have multi room viewing on your DVR, why would you need more than 1 or 2 DVRs. All cable providers are providing this service as well, which eliminates the $20 fee per month on each DVR.


----------



## Xsabresx (Oct 8, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I think the costs are close to around $400/unit. Sure this may have profit in it too.
> Broadcom and the other chip makers are taking their cut as these aren't used [in the same numbers] like cell phones, or computer chips.
> The monthly fees aren't related to the cost/or recovery of it, but "merely" another revenue stream for DirecTV, just like the $3/month for MRV.


So you are thinking that because the chips are basically used for this and only this it increases the cost? That actually makes sense.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

debell said:


> If you have multi room viewing on your DVR, why would you need more than 1 or 2 DVRs. All cable providers are providing this service as well, which eliminates the $20 fee per month on each DVR.


I certainly can't speak for everyone, but for me 3 HDDVRs and whole home is just about right. 2 of them for me and 1 for my son. We watch completely different things so we can't share much between us.

For my TV I have 2 HRs 'cause I need 4 tuners. Not uncommon during the broadcast channel's seasons for there to be 3 or 4 programs on at once that I want to watch and they don't repeat during the same week in general.

I noticed that Brighthouse claims 'up to 16 event options', but I couldn't find a rate sheet.


----------



## DogLover (Mar 19, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I think the costs are close to around $400/unit. Sure this may have profit in it too.
> Broadcom and the other chip makers are taking their cut as these aren't used [in the same numbers] like cell phones, or computer chips.
> The monthly fees aren't related to the cost/or recovery of it, but "merely" another revenue stream for DirecTV, just like the $3/month for MRV.


And don't forget, while the DIRECTV name is on the boxes, they are made by different manufacturers. Each of those manufacturers pay workers to assemble the boxes, as well as wanting to take a profit for their company.

I can easily see where the cost to DIRECTV is closer to the $400 ownership price than the $200 lease price.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

debell said:


> If you have multi room viewing on your DVR, why would you need more than 1 or 2 DVRs. All cable providers are providing this service as well, which eliminates the $20 fee per month on each DVR.


I don't know that all cable providers are offering a whole home DVR. Others have it in some markets. Brighthouse says it's not available in Birmingham Alabama for example.

Personally, I only have two DVRs and one H25. But I know people that have DVRs on every TV, for the times they are watching something live, they have trickplay.

I wasn't planning on having two DVRs, but I needed to switch out the H20 I had, and my wife was in charge of making the call. She didn't see a point in going with a regular receiver. Multiple DVRs is especially useful for having more than two tuners. Many cable boxes are limited to 20 hours of HD, and don't always support external drives.

Now, with the HR34, I might drop back to one DVR.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

dpeters11 said:


> I just don't know if all of them are. Of course usually you can get one DVR free as a new customer. I don't know if it's part of the acquisition costs etc.
> 
> But I know I'd rather pay the $200 up front then have a per account $7 a month than to pay a DVR fee on each box. I believe I've seen some cable providers charge up to almost $20 per DVR.


When I signed up I got 2 HRs free and got another one after I saw I needed it, the 3rd one cost me $200. But overall, I'm with you.

But these discussions are fun but fruitless. The bottom line is the bottom line and is really the only number that matters. D* makes up the bottom line with some line items, just as do every other provider, but it all is about the bottom line. The in-between numbers are just to allow them to adjust for how much equipment, how many services and what programming package are there.

Figure that the programming fee and DVR fee cover all that is needed for one HR. The other line items when you expand beyond that are for D* to generate the income from that expanded setup.

None of the numbers have a direct relationship to an actual cost, imo.


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

debell said:


> Your lack of punctuation makes your posts difficult to understand.
> 
> I don't know about Comcast, but with BHN you pay nothing for the receiver up front and you can schedule a technician to come and pick them up if you cancel or return to the local office. It doesn't get any easier than that


Need I remind you that a bad experience can happen with any company? Even with BHN's easy cancellation, there could still be issue [link]


> I have had horrible customer service from Brighthouse. I canceled service 2 months ago and since then have scheduled pick up of the modem 4 times and 4 times brighthouse did not show up at the 2 hour window that they scheduled with me. Each time I called I was told they would show up and scheduled the time; and each time they did not show up. Finally I spoke with a supervisor who said she would send a fed ex package and modem could be dropped into fed ex box.. they sent the fed ex label without package to wrong address.. I called again and gave them the information again with the right name and address- and still did not happen.


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

RACJ2 said:


> Need I remind you that a bad experience can happen with any company? Even with BHN's easy cancellation, there could still be issue [link]


I'm not sure what your point is. I've never argued that other companies don't have issues, I'm just making it a point that I had an issue with DirecTV.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

Build a DIY dual tuner PC-based dvr, tell me you can do it for less. Don't forget you have to take into acct the cost of the pc with a legal OS, dual tuner HD card, HDD of say 500GB. You cant use and old PC you have lying around to start with, it has to be from scratch. I cant really build one for less, in fact I believe it would cost more...plus when it dies I'm on the hook for it. I for one think $199(at most) for a reduced cost is reasonable. I'm not saying its cheap, but its not really out of line...each additional box on your account costs $6/month. you can look at it anyway you want, it doesnt matter what you call it, its $6/month, a fee they have always had, calling it a lease fee doesnt change what its for.


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

debell said:


> I'm not sure what your point is. I've never argued that other companies don't have issues, I'm just making it a point that I had an issue with DirecTV.


I guess my point is, anyone can have a bad experience. One person can love a company, another can hate that same company. They both feel they have valid reasons for their opinion. Neither person is going to convince the other person that their opinion is right. So its best to just forget about it and move on.

On the topic at hand, this has been mentioned before, but I'll reiterate the point. Whether its DIRECT, TMC, DISH or BHN, they all have a monthly price point they are trying to obtain, to make a profit.

When I had TW Cable, they charged no upfront for DVR's and $15/mo for each DVR. I had 2 DVR's so I paid $30/mo and $720 over a 24 mo period.

With DIRECTV, I paid $199 upfront for 1 DVR and the other was free. I pay $7/mo DVR service and $6/mo for 1 DVR for a total of $13/mo. So I paid $199 + ($13 x 24) = $511 over a 24 mo period. A savings of over $200 and if you keep them 3+ years, the savings increases exponentially.

So in reality, are DIRECTV's DVR's actually expensive? I would say that if someone is afraid to commit to 24 mo's, then cable is better for them. Even if the DVR's cost more in the long run..


----------



## poppo (Oct 10, 2006)

I always get a kick out of people complaining about $199. Most probably don't remember when the HD Tivos came out for $999 and people were scarfing them up, no questions asked.


----------



## TBoneit (Jul 27, 2006)

One other thing to remember with the $199 cost to lease a DVR. I suspect this point applies to Dishnetwork and DirecTV......

Cost of any needed hardware for the install. What percentage of installs need new cables run or a new dish or switch. For example going from SD to HD Significant parts and labor involved. 

I suspect that the Satellite companies have found it easier and more customer friendly to average out those costs and build them into the DVR lease fee.

Can you imagine the noise on the forums if Joe with a one SD DVR to HD DVR posted his costs and the next person reading it paid a lot more for the install portion due to the extra hardware needed for his four HD DVRS?

I hope I'm clear with my thoughts here. It isn't just the DVR hardware costs involved.


----------



## Xsabresx (Oct 8, 2007)

poppo said:


> I always get a kick out of people complaining about $199. Most probably don't remember when the HD Tivos came out for $999 and people were scarfing them up, no questions asked.


Well the thread was never meant to be a complaint, however your post sums up why my question ever came up. HD Tivos WERE $999 but the price dropped considerably over time.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

TBoneit said:


> One other thing to remember with the $199 cost to lease a DVR. I suspect this point applies to Dishnetwork and DirecTV......
> 
> Cost of any needed hardware for the install. What percentage of installs need new cables run or a new dish or switch. For example going from SD to HD Significant parts and labor involved.
> 
> ...


Good points. There's cables, connectors, LNBs, dishes, multiswitches, etc that are all "free" on installs.


----------



## Xsabresx (Oct 8, 2007)

CCarncross said:


> Build a DIY dual tuner PC-based dvr, tell me you can do it for less. Don't forget you have to take into acct the cost of the pc with a legal OS, dual tuner HD card, HDD of say 500GB. You cant use and old PC you have lying around to start with, it has to be from scratch. I cant really build one for less, in fact I believe it would cost more...plus when it dies I'm on the hook for it. I for one think $199(at most) for a reduced cost is reasonable. I'm not saying its cheap, but its not really out of line...each additional box on your account costs $6/month. you can look at it anyway you want, it doesnt matter what you call it, its $6/month, a fee they have always had, calling it a lease fee doesnt change what its for.


Well you are right there. If I was building ONE DVR I probably couldnt do it less than $199. If I was building 5-10million I bet I could do it for pennies on the dollar.


----------



## Xsabresx (Oct 8, 2007)

sigma1914 said:


> Good points. There's cables, connectors, LNBs, dishes, multiswitches, etc that are all "free" on installs.


But here's the rub. If I lease a box for $199 I get all of the things mentioned. If I BUY a box for $400-$500 I get all of the things mentioned.

Either way I am still paying the lease/mirror fee.

I guess really the answer to my question is a combination of VOS's answer and "because they can". It's fine. Like I had been harping on since the first post, I wasnt trying to start anything (contrary to what others may be trying to turn the thread into), I was just curious.


----------



## poppo (Oct 10, 2006)

Xsabresx said:


> Well you are right there. If I was building ONE DVR I probably couldnt do it less than $199. If I was building 5-10million I bet I could do it for pennies on the dollar.


Even it you were building 5-10 million, you still have a lot of overhead to recoup. And then there is the cost of getting them shipped etc.. I doubt your cost would be $199 or less.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Xsabresx said:


> But here's the rub. If I lease a box for $199 I get all of the things mentioned. If I BUY a box for $400-$500 I get all of the things mentioned.
> 
> Either way I am still paying the lease/mirror fee.
> 
> I guess really the answer to my question is a combination of VOS's answer and "because they can". It's fine. Like I had been harping on since the first post, I wasnt trying to start anything (contrary to what others may be trying to turn the thread into), I was just curious.


I get what you're saying and know you're not trying to start crap.  It's a legitimate curiosity.

I look at fees and billing with TV providers this way. Most are priced about the same when you throw out promotional stuff and have a simple setup. Each one has different billing items that end up getting to the same price point. Cable Company X will have "Free HD", but charge $19.99 for an HDDVR...Sat Company Y charges $10 for HD, but $6 for a HDDVR & a HD STB, & $3 for MRV. Both equal out to about $19-20.


----------



## BAHitman (Oct 24, 2007)

I think I read somewhere a while back that the BOM (Bill of Materials, or, each part) of the whole DVR cost somewhere around $250. this is cost of HDD, processor, memory chips, power supply parts, tuners, the case, etc... 

now you have to pay someone (pace, samsung, etc...) to put the hardware together, then there is packaging, and logistics (shipping, etc...). 

Before you can do any of that, you have to design it. this is not cheap... pay a bunch of engineers to think up a design, spec out the parts, etc... 

once you have the hardware, you load a bunch of software on it... some of the software that is used is free, others are not. the MPEG codecs that have to be licensed, regulatory fees (paying the FCC to test and put their seal on it) licensing for hardware (Dolby and HDMI, etc...) all have to be paid. 

I could easily see post-development cost beeing close to $400. 

The $6/month lease "fee" is simply to cover the cost of managing an additional piece of addressible equipment on the "network". I expect it also helps cover refurbishment when a defective unit gets returned and fixed to be sent out again until it's past it's lifecycle. 

I personally don't see a problem with the lease fee, either the up front one or the monthly maintenance


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Cables, switches, connectors, etc. "I don't think" are part of a DVR cost, since they'd still be needed for a receiver.
Build quantities may only be in the hundreds of thousands, and these may be split between manufactures.

The mirroring fee is because "they can", since if the cable is already there, and when you bought receivers, you still paid the fee and what on earth does it "cost them" to mirror a receiver off another one on the same account.
MRV cost them some to develop, but once that was done, there isn't any further cost, but it nets them $3/month/customer/account, and is making them millions.
It shouldn't be a surprise DirecTV is in business to make a profit, while spending hundreds of millions launching SATs, paying program providers, etc.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

BAHitman said:


> I think I read somewhere a while back that the BOM (Bill of Materials, or, each part) of the whole DVR cost somewhere around $250. this is cost of HDD, processor, memory chips, power supply parts, tuners, the case, etc...
> 
> now you have to pay someone (pace, samsung, etc...) to put the hardware together, then there is packaging, and logistics (shipping, etc...).
> 
> ...


You're in line with what I think too, "but" I don't think it's the monthly lease fee, but the $199 up front fee to cover the "recycling" [testing, repairing, shipping etc.] for the DVRs.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Why do you have to pay $400 to $600 for Ipad2 Tablets and other Tablets and $300 to $400 for a Smartphone with a 2 year commitment to Verizon, etc.

They have to recoup investment money and those who buy them first pay a Premium to be the First on the Block to have an IPAD2 or a Verizon Droid Razr or an Iphone4, etc.

It's just Marketing 101 and Steve Jobs of Apple was a Marketing Genius when it came to extracting money painlessly out of people's wallets even though his products were Innovative and Cutting Edge.

Charge what the Market will Bear. 

If you and others refused to pay $199 for the DVR Directv would eventually lower the cost.


----------



## Xsabresx (Oct 8, 2007)

richierich said:


> Why do you have to pay $400 to $600 for Ipad2 Tablets and other Tablets and $300 to $400 for a Smartphone with a 2 year commitment to Verizon, etc.
> 
> They have to recoup investment money and those who buy them first pay a Premium to be the First on the Block to have an IPAD2 or a Verizon Droid Razr or an Iphone4, etc.
> 
> ...


Except that we know there is $$350 worth of parts alone in an iPad2. I was just trying to get my head around how there is $250+ in parts in a DVR. Although I just looked at hdd prices and they seemed to have skyrocketed.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

It is all about Supply and Demand and What The Market Will Bear!!!

They have had Weather Related Problems in Asia ( Flooding in Thailand) that have stalled production of Hard Drives and Western Digital Hard Drives and others have skyrocketed in prices because of availability.

In fact it is almost impossible to buy a 2 TB WD20EURS right now because of Flooding In Thailand!!!


----------



## lugnutathome (Apr 13, 2009)

You've got design, parts, labor, distribution, maintenance, etc all in a proprietary component that you really don't want others tearing apart and self re engineering. 

Control ownership with a "lease" and a high non return (or outright purchase) price and keep a secondary market from forming.

I keep hearing some extremely high figure as being the cost to Direct TV for a DVR like in the 600 dollar range. One has to believe with economies of scale that is not an actual cost, rather a selling price number. 

They subcontract these things in mass quantities from factories that have OEM buying power from the chip manufacturers (or also possible is Direct TV negotiating the BOM item costs direct from chip manufacturers and distributing them to the factories as they are actually produced) so their actual per unit assembly and to shipping dock costs are probably not much above the 199.

I work in the apparel industry and we come up with an unfinished goods estimate for materials and go forth for bulk pricing. Then after the price negotiation we split it onto colorways and quantities for distribution to the factories we've negotiated the manufacturing with.

These factories then produce the garments and ship to either our distribution points or those of are larger customers directly.

Like in our business model I doubt they itemize R&D to the individual unit prices and instead that's a "corporate overhead" cost on another GL account likely with sub accounts for the various technology layers that comprise not only their services but the internal infrastructures to support them.

Again I'm just guessing here but I would suspect the high pricing is more about controlling the units so they can recycle them instead of always having to ship new. 

Don "I do not know if this is true, I only offer up an alternative view based on a different business model I've been involved in" Bolton


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

lugnutathome said:


> Don "I do not know if this is true, I only offer up an alternative view based on a different business model I've been involved in" Bolton


So you don't play one on TV and you didn't stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night, but you have an opinion. !rolling


----------



## fwlogue (Dec 6, 2006)

debell said:


> If you have multi room viewing on your DVR, why would you need more than 1 or 2 DVRs. All cable providers are providing this service as well, which eliminates the $20 fee per month on each DVR.


For some of us one DVR is not enough. There are times at my house all three of my DVR's are recording on both Tuners. That is 6 tuners at once recording.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

They also have to pay people to test, and repair them when they're sent back.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

I for one know he stayed in a Holiday Inn Express do Now We Know Where He Got His Information from!!!

In fact I think he performed Heart Surgery on me a few years back!!! :lol:


----------



## lugnutathome (Apr 13, 2009)

veryoldschool said:


> So you don't play one on TV and you didn't stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night, but you have an opinion. !rolling


Um yep. OK right?:goofygrin

Don "the voices made me do it really" Bolton


----------



## lugnutathome (Apr 13, 2009)

richierich said:


> I for one know he stayed in a Holiday Inn Express do Now We Know Where He Got His Information from!!!
> 
> In fact I think he performed Heart Surgery on me a few years back!!! :lol:


Egads! How's that aquarium pump working out for you anyway?:contract:

Don "I thought we'd wiped your memory" Bolton


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

The fact that these are leased as well means that D* can keep leasing these old units out over and over and over again, which will net them a LOT of loot, add the monthly service fee and you have one heck of a windfall.


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

RACJ2 said:


> I guess my point is, anyone can have a bad experience. One person can love a company, another can hate that same company. They both feel they have valid reasons for their opinion. Neither person is going to convince the other person that their opinion is right. So its best to just forget about it and move on.
> 
> On the topic at hand, this has been mentioned before, but I'll reiterate the point. Whether its DIRECT, TMC, DISH or BHN, they all have a monthly price point they are trying to obtain, to make a profit.
> 
> ...


And this is a good point, but most people don't settle for whatever when signing up for service. My local cable co provides me with many promotions that, when bundling with phone and/or internet service ends up being a great value. This is another advantage as well.

In reality, shelling out $200 for a DVR and not knowing if you're going to get the latest that's offered is a bit unfair. If you're going to pay $200 up front, you should at least be guaranteed a new or latest model receiver.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

debell said:


> And this is a good point, but most people don't settle for whatever when signing up for service. My local cable co provides me with many promotions that, when bundling with phone and/or internet service ends up being a great value. This is another advantage as well.
> 
> In reality, shelling out $200 for a DVR and not knowing if you're going to get the latest that's offered is a bit unfair. If you're going to pay $200 up front, you should at least be guaranteed a new or latest model receiver.


But most buyers of D* I believe are caught up in the "deal" they think they are getting...they don't see past that at least initially. That sets in a month or two later when they realize they got a used DVR that is slow and possibly not functionally properly. By then it is too late. You only have 30 days to cancel your service if you are not satisfied I believe it is still that way today. Maybe not .


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

"debell" said:


> And this is a good point, but most people don't settle for whatever when signing up for service. My local cable co provides me with many promotions that, when bundling with phone and/or internet service ends up being a great value. This is another advantage as well.
> 
> In reality, shelling out $200 for a DVR and not knowing if you're going to get the latest that's offered is a bit unfair. If you're going to pay $200 up front, you should at least be guaranteed a new or latest model receiver.


Except that the HR20, the oldest model, has every feature of the HR24, except for local 3D playback, and they have a swap out plan for that. Well, and it doesn't have DECA built in, but to me that's not really a difference. It is true that the ones before the 24 were slower, but that is changing a great deal now.

But they have done a great job at keeping the older boxes current where possible. It'd be a little better if the H20 had a network jack.


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

dpeters11 said:


> Except that the HR20, the oldest model, has every feature of the HR24, except for local 3D playback, and they have a swap out plan for that. Well, and it doesn't have DECA built in, but to me that's not really a difference. It is true that the ones before the 24 were slower, but that is changing a great deal now.
> 
> But they have done a great job at keeping the older boxes current where possible. It'd be a little better if the H20 had a network jack.


There's a reason it's a "newer model". It's a faster box and I'm sure it handles many things much better. It may not be extremely noticeable, but if I'm paying $200 I should be guaranteed a new box or latest model, not a model that has been recycled by about 3 different customers.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

"debell" said:


> There's a reason it's a "newer model". It's a faster box and I'm sure it handles many things much better. It may not be extremely noticeable, but if I'm paying $200 I should be guaranteed a new box or latest model, not a model that has been recycled by about 3 different customers.


I don't have a 24, but my 22 and 20 are pretty fast. Granted, I've never ended up with a box that looked heavily used or fell off a truck.

I'd certainly take it over the junk the local Time Warner uses.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

debell said:


> There's a reason it's a "newer model". It's a faster box and I'm sure it handles many things much better. It may not be extremely noticeable, but if I'm paying $200 I should be guaranteed a new box or latest model, not a model that has been recycled by about 3 different customers.


Could have been "recycled" many more times than that . :lol:

I mean if D* charges 199$ for each time they lease that old crummy unit out to a NEW customer plus the monthly fee that is one hell of a gravy train for them.

I do understand that correctly..that OLD used lease unit is always leased to a new customer at 199/mo plus monthly fee .right?


----------



## ehilbert1 (Jan 23, 2007)

I've never understood this either. Electronics go down every year. Just look at the Xbox and PS3. They become cheaper to make and the price goes down. Satellite and cable company always charge out the but for their DVR's and then love to raise the lease fee every few years. I just don't get it.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

Not only can these old leased units be recycled at 199$ to new customers BUT I believe that D* can get a tax write off on them in the end as well. Not a bad deal for them at all. Alone it isn't much but add them together and that must be a tidy sum for depreciation .


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

dubber deux said:


> ...
> 
> I do understand that correctly..that OLD used lease unit is always leased to a new customer at 199/mo plus monthly fee .right?


I can't let others get wrong info, so I had to reply.

No, this isn't correct. The $199 fee is on a case by case basis. Many customers do not pay anything.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

sigma1914 said:


> I can't let others get wrong info, so I had to reply.
> 
> No, this isn't correct. The $199 fee is on a case by case basis. Many customers do not pay anything.


You said "many" . But that still means that D* can do just what I said and make a nice profit off multiple charges of 199$ on the same old used DVR.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

dubber deux said:


> You said "many" . But that still means that D* can do just what I said and make a nice profit off multiple charges of 199$ on the same old used DVR.


Yes, but your original statement was incorrect. You said, "OLD used lease unit is *always *leased to a new customer at 199/mo plus monthly fee .right?"

That's incorrect, it's not always.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

sigma1914 said:


> Yes, but your original statement was incorrect. You said, "OLD used lease unit is *always *leased to a new customer at 199/mo plus monthly fee .right?"
> 
> That's incorrect, it's not always.


Yes, that is true, but you knew what I was getting at, I'm sure of it.

The bottom line is that D* can make multiple sums sending out the same old tired box to numerous customers.


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

sigma1914 said:


> I can't let others get wrong info, so I had to reply.
> 
> No, this isn't correct. The $199 fee is on a case by case basis. Many customers do not pay anything.


Many customers don't pay anything, but those that do pay $199 per receiver and sometimes get leased receivers then, correct?


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

"debell" said:


> Many customers don't pay anything, but those that do pay $199 per receiver and sometimes get leased receivers then, correct?


If you pay $199 through DirecTV or a reseller, you always get leased.


----------



## debell (Nov 6, 2011)

dpeters11 said:


> If you pay $199 through DirecTV or a reseller, you always get leased.


I'm sorry, I didn't mean leased receivers I meant used/recycled receivers.


----------



## wahooq (Oct 19, 2011)

my goodness


----------



## DogLover (Mar 19, 2007)

ehilbert1 said:


> I've never understood this either. Electronics go down every year. Just look at the Xbox and PS3. They become cheaper to make and the price goes down. Satellite and cable company always charge out the but for their DVR's and then love to raise the lease fee every few years. I just don't get it.


Actualy, I believe the lease/mirror fee has only been raised twice in 10 years, and one of those raises was for 1 cent.

And the up front fee for the HR series DVRs was $299 when they first came out, but have since been reduced to $199.

As with many companies, some fees do go up each year. However, the lease fee is not one of them.


----------



## n3vino (Oct 2, 2011)

richierich said:


> Charge what the Market will Bear.
> 
> If you and others refused to pay $199 for the DVR Directv would eventually lower the cost.


 They did. At this point in time, new customers get the first one free.


----------



## davidpo (Apr 6, 2006)

Is the box built in china? If so it costs maybe $10 to be built. It's amazing how cheap things can be built for, when the avg wage in china is well under $200 a month.


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

Xsabresx said:


> I am sure this had been explained probably numerous times here, but I havent found anything.
> 
> First, this is NOT a complaint thread. I understand it is what it is and I accept that as part of dealing with Directv. I am just curious.
> 
> ...





sigma1914 said:


> I think it's like every product...they're all cheap to make, but the seller wants money.


If we can get back to the original question, it was asked and answered in the first two posts of this thread.

I was friends with Jim Stewart, who was National Sales Manager of Yamaha Electronics Corp. (the United States consumer electronics side of the company) for a number of years. When we were friends, a decade had passed and he was free to talk. I asked him how he priced products when he was NSM. He answered certainly his costs from Nippon Gakki, the Japanese side of Yamaha, were a consideration, especially on the low end. He needed to cover his costs and with a very inexpensive piece, it may have not been by much. When it got to more expensive pieces, the retail price he would set was totally by what the market would bear. He'd look at the competition and price his products accordingly. If he thought he could sell a Yamaha receiver for a little more than the equivalent Marantz or Pioneer (his competition back in those days), he would price it that way. On some high end pieces, he would price his electronics deliberately high to make a point. The price alone said it was a quality piece (If a Mercedes sold for $15K, would you still think of it as a Mercedes?).

In other words, the price almost always had little to do with what it cost to make the piece.

This rang very true to me. I was an Economics major in college. The first day of Econ 101, they teach you the basic formula in economics: price equals marginal cost. In other words, the price of a product equals the cost to make one more. The second thing they teach you is that there isn't a businessman in the world who prices his goods this way. Economics uses math for explanations of past performance and predictions of future ones. There the P=MC formula works but not in real life.

If DVRs were interchangeable and you could use a Dish DVR with your cable or DirecTV systems, then you could expect competition to bring down the price. As long as they are proprietary, competition is not a big factor.

DVRs are the price they are because that's what the seller thinks they can get for them.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

davidpo said:


> Is the box built in china? If so it costs maybe $10 to be built. It's amazing how cheap things can be built for, when the avg wage in china is well under $200 a month.


I truly hope you're kidding, cos if you're not, you really don't understand things very well.:nono2:


----------



## ChicagoBlue (Apr 29, 2011)

dubber deux said:


> The fact that these are leased as well means that D* can keep leasing these old units out over and over and over again, which will net them a LOT of loot, add the monthly service fee and you have one heck of a windfall.


You are not factoring in the other side of the equation. DVRs fail more than any other type of receiver, which adds tremendous cost to DTV. Even ones that don't fail, when customers leave DTV has to refurbish those receivers at an expense.

As an example, say a HD-DVR cost then $150 to purchase. Each time they refurb it costs another $65.

You guys should look at their earnings statements and calculate how much profit is really there after their expenses on a percentage basis. You would be surprised that is isn't nearly what some people here make it out to be.


----------



## ChicagoBlue (Apr 29, 2011)

davidpo said:


> Is the box built in china? If so it costs maybe $10 to be built. It's amazing how cheap things can be built for, when the avg wage in china is well under $200 a month.


You simply have no idea what you are saying with that comment. I know for a fact that new HMC is costing DTV north of $300 to be built and they are built in China. Labor is cheap in China, but that doesn't mean the components, the hard drives (1 terrabyte), the mother board, etc, etc are pennies. This is beyond foolish.


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

Isn't there some licensing fees that come into the equation also?


----------



## ChicagoBlue (Apr 29, 2011)

trh said:


> Isn't there some licensing fees that come into the equation also?


There is for the new TiVo box and with NDS for some others.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

trh said:


> Isn't there some licensing fees that come into the equation also?


There definitely is with MPEG2, I dont know about MPEG4....plus the DD licensing fees...


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

At one point, there was a fee for MPEG4, capped at $1 million. I don't know if that's changed. I'd think there would also be HDMI licensing etc. 

Taking out the OTA certainly saved some money.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

ChicagoBlue said:


> You are not factoring in the other side of the equation. DVRs fail more than any other type of receiver, which adds tremendous cost to DTV. Even ones that don't fail, when customers leave DTV has to refurbish those receivers at an expense.
> 
> .


But WHY do they FAIL?

Because D specs them to bring their cost down to very little.

Maybe they should build the units to be more robust at a slightly higher cost.

It doesn't cost D* much at all to send out fully functional units returned back from other customers. At the warehouse they probably use windex to wipe it down, have it briefly tested, and then throw it in a box to the next customer.


----------



## gilviv (Sep 18, 2007)

:beatdeadhorse:


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dubber deux said:


> It doesn't cost D* much at all to send out fully functional units returned back from other customers. At the warehouse they probably use windex to wipe it down, have it briefly tested, and then throw it in a box to the next customer.


I know you're merely guessing here, and the real story is....
The refurb centers do have two paths that these receivers take.


when there isn't any known technical reason, as they get "the short trip" through.
There is a known, or suspected technical problem, which get "the long trip" through the center. These have an additional eight hours of testing.


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

poppo said:


> I always get a kick out of people complaining about $199. Most probably don't remember when the HD Tivos came out for $999 and people were scarfing them up, no questions asked.


I go back farther than that. I worked for Hughes Aircraft when DirecTV was a subsidiary company. I paid $700 for a receiver, not a DVR, in the early 90's and that was an employee discount price. I owned that one.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

dubber deux said:


> But WHY do they FAIL?
> 
> Because D specs them to bring their cost down to very little.
> 
> ...


Why do any electronics fail? Why did my 8 month old 2TB WD AVGP drive fail? I think the units are actually lasting a little too long, and before you squawk let me make my point...No one wants anything but HR24's and higher now, but there are literally millioins of HR20-23's out there that havent died yet and are being refurb'ed and sent back out....Please find a new soapbox to climb up on.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

billsharpe said:


> I go back farther than that. I worked for Hughes Aircraft when DirecTV was a subsidiary company. I paid $700 for a receiver, not a DVR, in the early 90's and that was an employee discount price. I owned that one.


Don't get me started on the Sony HD SAT200 I bought [circa '03] for $800 that was the biggest POS I've ever had. Even Sony admitted it and replaced it 18 months later with their 300, which did work. :lol:


----------



## TBoneit (Jul 27, 2006)

fwlogue said:


> For some of us one DVR is not enough. There are times at my house all three of my DVR's are recording on both Tuners. That is 6 tuners at once recording.


I don't know how you can find the time to watch all that content. If it get two hours a night to watch that is a lot. 6 tuners would be wasted on me. I get by with one dual tuner DVR and a single tuner DVD recorder with Hard drive.



billsharpe said:


> I go back farther than that. I worked for Hughes Aircraft when DirecTV was a subsidiary company. I paid $700 for a receiver, not a DVR, in the early 90's and that was an employee discount price. I owned that one.


I seem to recall paying a lot for the two RCAs I bought back when, the Sony's were a little higher as I remember it. I remember search took forever. One was a DRD503RB. Don't recall the model on the other one.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

TBoneit said:


> I don't know how you can find the time to watch all that content. If it get two hours a night to watch that is a lot. 6 tuners would be wasted on me. I get by with one dual tuner DVR and a single tuner DVD recorder with Hard drive.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure about the OP you quoted, but some factors in life are different for each of us. For example, I am disabled (Muscular Dystrophy) and unable to work so I record a lot of programs and watch a ton of sports. Others may need multiple DVRs for families with different views on what's entertaining.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> I'm not sure about the OP you quoted, but some factors in life are different for each of us. For example, I am disabled (Muscular Dystrophy) and unable to work so I record a lot of programs and watch a ton of sports. Others may need multiple DVRs for families with different views on what's entertaining.


In my case, it is that I'm retired and watch TV at varying times, sometimes for a short while, other times much longer. And I like scripted shows including the many on broadcast TV. So it takes a couple of HRs just to fill my viewing desires.

And then there's my adult son. He has terrible taste in shows he wants to watch! :lol:


----------



## BAHitman (Oct 24, 2007)

TBoneit said:


> I don't know how you can find the time to watch all that content. If it get two hours a night to watch that is a lot. 6 tuners would be wasted on me. I get by with one dual tuner DVR and a single tuner DVD recorder with Hard drive.


I have a 10 person family so having 6 DVR's is not out of the question... and you bet as soon as I can get my hands on an HR34 even at #399 I will...

:backtotop

Wonder how much the HR34 cost to manufacture?...


----------



## TBoneit (Jul 27, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> I'm not sure about the OP you quoted, but some factors in life are different for each of us. For example, I am disabled (Muscular Dystrophy) and unable to work so I record a lot of programs and watch a ton of sports. Others may need multiple DVRs for families with different views on what's entertaining.


I suppose I should clarify. There are two dual tuner DVRs I use one exclusively and another family member uses the other one.

Does anyone even make a single tuner DVR? I suspect I'm being redundant calling it a dual tuner.......

Some users on another forum refer to the DVD recorder with Hard drive as a DVR. It really isn't even though I use it that way for overflow timers. It records at 720 by 480 from the HD local channels. So I get widescreen recordings that fill the screen with one button press on the TV remote with no distortion. Much like a widescreen DVD does. It looks as good since it records from a HD channel. programmable fwd skip and rev skip. It gets me all the sub-channels too.



BAHitman said:


> I have a 10 person family so having 6 DVR's is not out of the question... and you bet as soon as I can get my hands on an HR34 even at #399 I will...
> 
> :backtotop
> 
> Wonder how much the HR34 cost to manufacture?...


if the monthly fees were the same and it had user control so one user could be assigned two tuners and another user the balance of the tuners and the same with recordings. If user 1 was the only one that could watch theirs and user2 was the only one that could watch their recordings.

Or
If only the user who created the timers could erase it and the recordings from it.

Having had to many timers aborted and recordings erased in the past before I could view them.....


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

CCarncross said:


> Why do any electronics fail? Why did my 8 month old 2TB WD AVGP drive fail? I think the units are actually lasting a little too long, and before you squawk let me make my point


 nope, I still don't think you are making any common sense here.

As long as there are different levels of programming and SD ...HD ..there will be a use for older equipment. If you pay less you should get less.



> ...No one wants anything but HR24's and higher now,


Maybe on this board, but many customers are just fine with the older models, your point is invalid.



> but there are literally millioins of HR20-23's out there that havent died yet and are being refurb'ed and sent back out....Please find a new soapbox to climb up on.


Great, this is why D* should spec the equipment to be more robust, you made my point perfectly. Thanks.


----------



## davidpo (Apr 6, 2006)

ChicagoBlue said:


> You simply have no idea what you are saying with that comment. I know for a fact that new HMC is costing DTV north of $300 to be built and they are built in China. Labor is cheap in China, but that doesn't mean the components, the hard drives (1 terrabyte), the mother board, etc, etc are pennies. This is beyond foolish.


 That was labor genius probly even less. Material wise I have no clue and neither do you unless your high level at directv.


----------



## davidpo (Apr 6, 2006)

CCarncross said:


> I truly hope you're kidding, cos if you're not, you really don't understand things very well.:nono2:


You would be surprised as to what I understand since I've been in the manufacturing biz for 20+ years. The biggest cost in almost all items manufactured is labor,and if you dont know this labor is dirt cheap in china so cheap it should be illegal.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

davidpo said:


> You would be surprised as to what I understand since I've been in the manufacturing biz for 20+ years. The biggest cost in almost all items manufactured is labor,and if you dont know this labor is dirt cheap in china so cheap it should be illegal.


Not sure what you've been manufacturing, but this isn't "always" the case. While the less it gets "touched" the cheaper, sometimes the parts are still more than the labor.


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

ChicagoBlue said:


> DVRs fail more than any other type of receiver, which adds tremendous cost to DTV.





dubber deux said:


> But WHY do they FAIL?
> 
> Because D specs them to bring their cost down to very little.
> 
> Maybe they should build the units to be more robust at a slightly higher cost.


Certainly there is always this trade off, dubber deux, but I think DirecTV's DVRs are pretty robust myself. How many HR20s are there still out in the field? My guess, and of course it is just a guess, is hundreds of thousands. Even if it's just tens of thousands, that's pretty good for a piece that is 4-6 years old. My HR20-700 is over 4 1/2 years old. Its hard drive has been spinning away 24/7 ever since then and it still works great.

Usually when you have mass casualties in a specific model, it's not because of a cheap design but because of one part that goes bad in every single piece. It's often because of an innovative but insufficiently tested design or maybe a poorly thought out parts substitution. Anybody remember the electrolytic capacitor shortage of 12 or so years ago? That caused a lot of failures in particular models (not DirecTV products per se) because last minute parts substitutions were made to keep the assembly lines rolling.

As to why DVRs fail, it's because the whole univerise is failing. Entropy is real. Iron rusts. Mountains fall. Batteries run dry.

But then don't get me started.


----------



## Xsabresx (Oct 8, 2007)

Even I understand that electronics work exactly until they dont. Could be 2 days, 2 months or 20 years.


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

debell said:


> And this is a good point, but most people don't settle for whatever when signing up for service. My local cable co provides me with many promotions that, when bundling with phone and/or internet service ends up being a great value. This is another advantage as well.
> 
> In reality, shelling out $200 for a DVR and not knowing if you're going to get the latest that's offered is a bit unfair. If you're going to pay $200 up front, you should at least be guaranteed a new or latest model receiver.


I agree with you, if you are a new customer they should provide new equipment. I did get 2 brand new DVR's when I signed up. I also delayed my install until they agreed to put in a SWiM dish, before they became standard installs.


----------



## davidpo (Apr 6, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> Not sure what you've been manufacturing, but this isn't "always" the case. While the less it gets "touched" the cheaper, sometimes the parts are still more than the labor.


True,but it happens more often than not. Small scale manufacturing I'd say the material or parts cost is the highest,but large scale it used to be labor.China has solved the labor part for the companies.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

davidpo said:


> True,but it happens more often than not. Small scale manufacturing I'd say the material or parts cost is the highest,but large scale it used to be labor.China has solved the labor part for the companies.


Scale has everything to do with it, and "you're right".
I worked for a cable equipment supplier of fiber optic receiver/transmitters and while they did build/sell a lot, even with US labor, parts were significantly more than the labor involved.


----------



## maartena (Nov 1, 2010)

Look at the prices of laptops, tablets, smart phones.... the first two easily cost you $500-$600 out of pocket, and the last category often goes for $199 provided you have a 2 year contract at $80 a month or so, or you can buy the unlocked version for $649. (That is the price of the cheapest iPhone 4S that is not locked to a provider.

Sure, a DVR is "a box with a hard drive", but yet there is a lot of technology behind it. There is software to develop, software to keep up to date, there is a main board with processing power, memory, more or less like a laptop.... just without the screen. But with more interfaces on the back side, and with 2 tuners built in.

Just for shizzles, and for the sake of technology that is probably comparable and can do the job.... go google what the following components cost:

- A 500 Gb hard drive.
- A main board with a 1.8 Ghz Atom processor built in.
- Two PCI-Express TV Tuner Cards.
- 2 Gb of RAM.
- A case to put it all in that is small.
- A power supply.
- Estimate the cost for cables, a remote, and what it would cost for the custom OS.

You'd be surprised when you add it all up. Technology isn't as cheap as you think it is. Even mass produced.


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

Let us not forget DirecTV is a publicly held corporation and they have an obligation to their shareholders to make a profit.


----------



## HerntDawg (Oct 6, 2008)

They have a "monopoly" on their consumers(box wise), right or wrong, it is what it is. If you don't like it go somewhere else. That is the essence of capitalism.


----------



## AntAltMike (Nov 21, 2004)

The Channel Master, model TV CM 7400 HD DVR's pre-order price on their own site is $400. Add maybe ten bucks for de-encryption and security, and that's a good indication of the non-monopoly price for hardware that can do what a DirecTV DVR can do. And I see that the Channel Master box has a 320 GB hard drive, whereas the HR24 has a 500 GB hard drive.

But DirecTV assumes a lot more responsibility when it sells a DVR, because it is sold to a customer who purchased it to enable him to receive and record programming that he is contractually committed to paying $100 a month for. When the device fails, he demands a credit on his account for the outage interval. He expects to be able to call for assistance 24 hours a day. Are Channel Master customer service reps available 24/7? Will Channel Master make a service tech available for field service for $70 or whatever DirecTV charges for out-of warranty service these days? And if a Channel Master customer cannot be satisfied, they could bail out by giving a pro-rated refund, but DirecTV can't do that because of the contractual programming commitment. That additioinal responsibility alone warrants adding a hundred or two to the "clean sale" price of such devices.


----------



## Scott Kocourek (Jun 13, 2009)

AntAltMike I would like to add that DIRECTV will also send you another DVR if yours stops working, they may charge you for shipping but it's almost like getting a lifetime warranty, you may get a refurbished DVR but you will get another. That alone has to be worth a lot of money.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

HerntDawg said:


> They have a "monopoly" on their consumers(box wise), right or wrong, it is what it is. If you don't like it go somewhere else. That is the essence of capitalism.


Well, factually, you're wrong about what constitutes a monopoly, and your "essence of capitalism" definition is lacking, uh, definition!


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

HerntDawg said:


> They have a "monopoly" on their consumers(box wise), right or wrong, it is what it is.


This is not the case. DIRECTV partnered with TiVo to create a box.

In view of that experience, it is understandable that nobody else wants the frustration.


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

*ZING!*

Nice one, harsh. :righton: 

Although I wouldn't be surprised, given the long delay, if there wasn't frustration on both sides.


----------



## AntAltMike (Nov 21, 2004)

I don't see what you are arguing about. DirecTV has monopolistic control over the D-series boxes that are made by half a dozen manufacturers, and THAT INCLUDES monopolistic control over any DirecTV-compatible boxes incorporating TIVO proprietary systems. Weren't those TIVO DVRs also made by multiple manufacturers?


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

It's a matter of semantics. DirecTV does not have a monopoly. We have alternatives in cable, Dish and other ways to get television service.

To say they have a monopoly is like saying Apple has a monopoly by forcing you to use their closed architecture and operating system with their pieces. No, there are plenty of other smart phones, tablets, computers and mp3 players out there.

DirecTV has a proprietary product you have to use to make their system work. That's something completely different.

Maybe a better example would be the engine to your car. Nobody would say Ford has a monopoly over the engine you can use in your Fusion. 

The difference isn't trivial. Monopolies are generally considered illegal, if not just bad for the economy and the consumer. Making you use a proprietary product isn't. You, as a consumer, chose to buy it. You did have alternatives. Proprietary products aren't illegal.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Good explanation, Carl. I wouldn't have the patience to write it out like that.


----------



## Scott Kocourek (Jun 13, 2009)

AntAltMike said:


> I don't see what you are arguing about. DirecTV has monopolistic control over the D-series boxes that are made by half a dozen manufacturers, and it has monopolistic control over anything incorporating TIVO proprietary systems. Weren't those TIVO DVRs also made by multiple manufacturers?


Every business makes choices and has control over vendors or subcontractors that they may or may not want to use, that has nothing to do with a monopoly.


----------



## AntAltMike (Nov 21, 2004)

Scott Kocourek said:


> Every business makes choices and has control over vendors or subcontractors that they may or may not want to use, that has nothing to do with a monopoly.


It isn't just a matter of choosing vendors. Anyone can make and sell you Ford brake shoes, with or without Ford's permission, but no one can manufacture a DirecTV receiver without acceding to DirecTV's demands regarding performance and even price.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Well this has been a fun thread! 

But it is really all for naught as I don't think D* calculates the way we are doing in this thread. D*, just like most service oriented businesses, wants to generate a certain average revenue stream from their subscribers. How that stream is made up in these discussions is kind of fiction.

And of course, the way that the bill is made up fits some of the advertising that companies use. Like, 'cheapest programming cost'! Yeah, it is true, E* does have that, but they make up for it in the equipment cost lines. Which brings up a question in my mind, how much is the 'average' bill from D* and E*?

I think that number will be real close...


----------



## Scott Kocourek (Jun 13, 2009)

The brakes that come on a Ford vehicle from the factory have specifications set by Ford and that no way make them a Monopoly. In many cases if you use a part that is not approved a vehicle manufacturer does not have to help you troubleshoot it or fix it under warranty. I never had to call TiVo when I had problems with my receiver, I called DIRECTV.

The word monopoly is thrown around as a feel good term, it's easy to hate a monopoly. DIRECTV makes business decisions that are best for them, that doesn't make them a monopoly.


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

AntAltMike said:


> It isn't just a matter of choosing vendors. Anyone can make and sell you Ford brake shoes, with or without Ford's permission, but no one can manufacture a DirecTV receiver without acceeding to DirecTV's demands regarding performance and even price.


Brake pads are a subcomponent that can be changed out. I'd compare them to the HDMI cable that comes in the box with the DVR. You can replace that with a Monster Cable if you wish, just like you can buy aftermarket shoes. The DVR is more like the whole wheel assembly. You can't take a Chevy wheel/tires/brakes/strut/tie rod/bearing assembly and use it on your Ford.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Carl Spock said:


> You can't take a Chevy wheel/tires/brakes/strut/tie rod/bearing assembly and use it on your Ford.


Yes you can, but "it ain't easy". :lol:

DirecTV would have a "monopoly" if there weren't other Satellite TV providers, and you could only get TV service through a SAT feed at your location.


----------



## Scott Kocourek (Jun 13, 2009)

veryoldschool said:


> Yes you can, but "it ain't easy". :lol:
> 
> DirecTV would have a "monopoly" if there weren't other Satellite TV providers, and you could only get TV service through a SAT feed at your location.


Would that still be true if you could get your TV through the mail like Netflix?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Scott Kocourek said:


> Would that still be true if you could get your TV through the mail like Netflix?


Well "maybe" if you could watch it live. :lol:


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

veryoldschool said:


> Yes you can, but "it ain't easy". :lol:


Maybe you can! 

You can also use the Hauppauge DVR with your DirecTV HD receiver if you don't want to pay the DVR fee plus $199 up front. As I read their literature, the Hauppauge DVR will even change the channels of your receiver for you.

The question is do you want to go through the rigmarole to make it work?

If you are hot rodder and want to put Chevy small block engine into your '32 Ford Deuce coupe, you certainly can. It's been done hundreds of times, just like I'm sure there are many folks on this board who use the Hauppauge DVR with their DirecTV HD receiver.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

AntAltMike said:


> I don't see what you are arguing about. DirecTV has monopolistic control over the D-series boxes that are made by half a dozen manufacturers, and it has monopolistic control over anything incorporating TIVO proprietary systems. Weren't those TIVO DVRs also made by multiple manufacturers?


This is correct. Unless you want to twist the truth and say that confabulating the use of a product not intended for use with D*is an alternative to being forced to use the D* boxes.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here.


----------



## Xsabresx (Oct 8, 2007)

Can I just point out that what I thought was an interesting question has turned into quite the lesson in electronic manufacturing and marketing? :icon_cool


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

dubber deux said:


> This is correct. Unless you want to twist the truth and say that confabulating the use of a product not intended for use with D*is an alternative to being forced to use the D* boxes.


Is CONFABULATING an actual word??? :lol:


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

Xsabresx said:


> Can I just point out that what I thought was an interesting question has turned into quite the lesson in electronic manufacturing and marketing?


And this is also the first time the word "confabulate" has been used in the millions of posts on DBSTalk!



richierich said:


> Is CONFABULATING an actual word???


Yes. It means to informally discuss.

What a thread. :righton:


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

richierich said:


> Is CONFABULATING an actual word??? :lol:


Yep.

I just felt like using a silly but accurate word. It kind of reminds me of my experience in dealing with D* CSRs pickme: .

Actually it can also mean remembering a complicated but easily confused process.

DO I WIN A PRIZE?

I'd like to be CEO of D* for one week.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Carl Spock said:


> And this is also the first time the word "confabulate" has been used in the millions of posts on DBSTalk!
> 
> Yes. It means to informally discuss.
> 
> What a thread. :righton:


Was it properly used, though?


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

Yes, although I'm with Stuart. Grammatically, the sentence is correct but I don't get dubbers point.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Confabulation is defined as the Process of Remembering a complicated and intricate process that can be lead astray at any given point.

Also, Confabulation is the Process where a memory is falsely remembered.


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

You're going to make me look it up, aren't you?

I first heard confabulation at a conference when the moderator told us to confabulate in break-out groups.

Good ol' Google sez:

con·fab·u·late

/kənˈfabyəˌlāt/

Verb:

1.Engage in conversation; talk.

2.Fabricate imaginary experiences as compensation for loss of memory.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I seem to remember hang gliding over a forest full of guinea pigs while discussing the meaning of that word.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

From wikipedia

Confabulation : The process of remembering is a complicated and intricate process that can be lead astray at any given point.

Ha...now that does sound like dealing with D*'s "system.


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I seem to remember hang gliding over a forest full of guinea pigs while discussing the meaning of that word.


No, no, no.

Stuart, there is as difference between confabulation and premature senility.

Can you tell me what you had for breakfast this morning?


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I cannot.


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

QED


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

dubber deux said:


> From wikipedia
> 
> Confabulation : The process of remembering is a complicated and intricate process that can be lead astray at any given point.
> 
> Ha...now that does sound like dealing with D*'s "system.


That's the definition when dealing with psychiatry. That's not being discussed here. You're using it improperly, IMO.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Oh jeez, I didn't know you were bringing _Latin_ into the conversation!

"Si illo ambulare possem, ergo non talcum requiram."


----------



## jahgreen (Dec 15, 2006)

richierich said:


> Is CONFABULATING an actual word??? :lol:


It sure is, and a darn good one, although I don't think it was used correctly in that sentence.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

sigma1914 said:


> That's the definition when dealing with psychiatry. That's not being discussed here. You're using it improperly, IMO.


Not really, dealing with D*'s "system" is a form of psychological torture.
:kickbutt:

But yeah I'm stretching here sigma...kinda like the CSRs do. :dance07:

BTW sigma...thank you for replying in a civil manner. Appreciated.


----------



## jahgreen (Dec 15, 2006)

It would be a relatively simple, although tedious, task to open one of the DVRs, inventory every part, and price them.

Or you can pay someone else to do it for you. Has anyone reviewed a report from isuppli?

http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/Pages/DirecTV-H24-100-HD-Set-Top-Box-Hardware-Analysis.aspx


----------



## AntAltMike (Nov 21, 2004)

According to my spellcheck, "spellcheck" isn't even a word.:eek2:


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

AntAltMike said:


> According to my spellcheck, "spellcheck" isn't even a word.:eek2:


That's because it is Software!!!


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

But according to spellcheck, should "software" be capitalized?


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Stuart Sweet said:


> But according to spellcheck, should "software" be capitalized?


No but the person who does that has Mental Problems!!! :lol:

He also likes to use a lot of Capital Letters to Emphasize Things and he also uses a lot of Exclamation Marks and don't ask me why but he hasn't been the same since he had a wreck on his motorcycle!!!


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Oh Yeah, I Forgot!


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Oh Yeah, I Forgot!


Now You Get It!!! :lol:


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> But according to spellcheck, should "software" be capitalized?


:backtotop

[ducks quickly]


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Yeah, VOS is right, we've had our fun... let's get back to our knitting.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Now, Where Were We??? :lol:


----------



## HerntDawg (Oct 6, 2008)

I was not saying that DIRECTV is a monopoly in itself, I just meant they hold you to using only their boxes and no one elses. I think they should go back to the way it was before when they let multiple manufacturers make boxes. I mean look at the amount of choices you have for cell phones, hundreds for each carrier. Choices are better IMO.


----------



## AntAltMike (Nov 21, 2004)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Oh jeez, I didn't know you were bringing _Latin_ into the conversation!...


"I'd say, _res ipsa locutor_, if I thought you'd have a clue what it meant."

- District Attorney Sylvia Costas, from the NYPD Blue pilot episode.


----------



## AntAltMike (Nov 21, 2004)

HerntDawg said:


> I think they should go back to the way it was before when they let multiple manufacturers make boxes. I mean look at the amount of choices you have for cell phones, hundreds for each carrier. Choices are better IMO.


The 3 digit suffix on a DirecTV box indicates its manufacturer:

Thompson:100 
Samsung: 200 
Philips: 300 
Hughes: 400 
Humax: 500 
LG: 600 
Pace: 700

The present "problem" is that DirecTV doesn't want variation of its product. Like Henry Ford and Ma Bell used to say, you can have any color you want, as long as it's black.


----------



## Scott Kocourek (Jun 13, 2009)

HerntDawg said:


> I was not saying that DIRECTV is a monopoly in itself, I just meant they hold you to using only their boxes and no one elses. I think they should go back to the way it was before when they let multiple manufacturers make boxes. I mean look at the amount of choices you have for cell phones, hundreds for each carrier. Choices are better IMO.


The cell phone carrier that I use also decides what makes/models and features they will allow on their system, I have an android phone that has the internal FM radio deactivated that other carriers allow. My point is DIRECTV picks and chooses what they will allow to operate on their system, there are a lot of security issues and troubleshooting issues with allowing everything under the sun.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

AntAltMike said:


> The 3 digit suffix on a DirecTV box indicates its manufacturer:
> 
> Thompson:100
> Samsung: 200
> ...


Or silver. Though I think he was talking the old days, like this box.
http://sadoun.com/Sat/Products/DirecTV/RCA-DR2.jpg


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

AntAltMike said:


> "I'd say, _res ipsa locutor_, if I thought you'd have a clue what it meant."
> - District Attorney Sylvia Costas, from the NYPD Blue pilot episode.


:hurah:'

Estne volumen in toga, an solum tibi libet me videre?

Prolly not actual Latin, but no scholars were harmed in creating the above. :lol:

Thanks, Mae......


----------



## Scott Kocourek (Jun 13, 2009)

Laxguy said:


> :hurah:'
> 
> Estne volumen in toga, an solum tibi libet me videre?
> 
> ...


We're just happy to see ya! 

Search engines are a wonderful thing.


----------



## AntAltMike (Nov 21, 2004)

_"Move dish 3 degrees."_


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Heh.

:wizardhat


----------



## gnillort (Nov 15, 2011)

Scott Kocourek said:


> The cell phone carrier that I use also decides what makes/models and features they will allow on their system, I have an android phone that has the internal FM radio deactivated that other carriers allow. My point is DIRECTV picks and chooses what they will allow to operate on their system, there are a lot of security issues and troubleshooting issues with allowing everything under the sun.


I am sure the reason DirecTV doesnt' allow certain features has nothing to do with security and more to do with how much money they will make or charge for that feature.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

gnillort said:


> I am sure the reason DirecTV doesnt' allow certain features has nothing to do with security and more to do with how much money they will make or charge for that feature.


Don't agree.

However, I am openminded: Could you post an example where that might be true?


----------



## davidpo (Apr 6, 2006)

maartena said:


> Look at the prices of laptops, tablets, smart phones.... the first two easily cost you $500-$600 out of pocket, and the last category often goes for $199 provided you have a 2 year contract at $80 a month or so, or you can buy the unlocked version for $649. (That is the price of the cheapest iPhone 4S that is not locked to a provider.
> 
> Sure, a DVR is "a box with a hard drive", but yet there is a lot of technology behind it. There is software to develop, software to keep up to date, there is a main board with processing power, memory, more or less like a laptop.... just without the screen. But with more interfaces on the back side, and with 2 tuners built in.
> 
> ...


Tell ya what get a order direct from western digital for a million 500 Gb hd's then get back to me.I'll tell ya right now its alot less than newegg or even wholesale cost.

Btw that iphone that cost someone 649 to buy unlocked was way less for Apple to get manufactured,but as you know Apple must show massive profits to its shareholders. Someday in the near future companies will price themselves right out of business. I look forward to that day.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

Sure, buying in large bulk is cheaper than we can buy 1 or 2, but it isnt free...so lets say we can buy the components for $400, factor in labor costs, maybe cut the parts cost by 50%, you're still looking at $200...


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

Parts are down a lot more than 50% if you are buying wholesale in bulk.

I've always assumed that $200 back in the HR20 days covered DirecTV's internal costs. That's what I'd do. You'll make the profit on the lease fee and the programming but at least you aren't losing money when you deliver one.

But that was with the HR20. I have to believe the HR21 was less expensive to make than the HR20, with the HR22 less expensive to make than the HR21, etc. That means they are more than covering their manufacturing and shipping costs with a HR24.

God bless them. As has been pointed out up thread, DirecTV is supposed to make money.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Carl Spock said:


> I've always assumed that $200 back in the HR20 days covered DirecTV's internal costs.


Well "back in the HR20 days", it was $299 and the $199 fee didn't come out until the HR21 had.
Not sure the HR22 was any cheaper as they're a HR21 with a larger drive.
The HR23 changed Sat tuner chips, but I kind of doubt Broadcom charged less for their newer chip.

While there are "millions" of HR2x out there, they're split between four manufactures and the batch runs are in the thousands/tens of thousands [maybe in the hundred thousand], so [again] I doubt they have the scale of millions for purchasing power.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

davidpo said:


> Btw that iphone that cost someone 649 to buy unlocked was way less for Apple to get manufactured,but as you know Apple must show massive profits to its shareholders.


 They do also have to pay rent, insurance, salaries, airfare, corporate jets, hardware & software developers, lots of Bunga-Bunga parties, real estate taxes, bonuses etc etc which all needs to get built into the price. Bottom line is they probably make no more than $600 on each after all that is considered. :lol:


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

veryoldschool said:


> Well "back in the HR20 days", it was $299 and the $199 fee didn't come out until the HR21 had.


I spent $299 for mine but I remember it dropping to $199 before it was discontinued.

As for the stuff getting cheaper with each new model, I'm going from my experience from other consumer electronics. There is a never ending push to make things for cheaper the next time around.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Carl Spock said:


> I spent $299 for mine but I remember it dropping to $199 before it was discontinued.
> 
> As for the stuff getting cheaper with each new model, I'm going from my experience from other consumer electronics. *There is a never ending push to make things for cheaper the next time around*.


"Of course" and dropping the OTA tuners is a sign of that.
Each model and manufacture has its own development costs to recover too.

I guess my major "push back here", is that the scale of production I don't think is on par with examples others are using.

Lord knows how many cell phones are made or how many PCs Dell produces. :shrug:


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

And, lest we forget, there is a license fee for EVERY DirecTV receiver due to Videoguard (NDS) for the smartcard security system.


----------



## usnret (Jan 16, 2009)

Maybe if they hired a GE accountant they could offer the boxes a bit cheaper??


----------



## sunking (Feb 17, 2004)

There are companies such as iSuppli that will publish boms and cost to manufacture. It doesn't look like they've ever published any sort of DVR, for public use at least.

For comparison, they have an iPhone 4S at $188 parts, $8 manufacturing. I know, apples to oranges, just throwing out an example of what it takes to make and what they charge.

In my opinion I don't believe that Directv sells them for a loss. And even if they did they would garner about as much pitty from me as the phone carriers and their subsidizing of phones. Apple relies on iTune sales to make their profit. Directv should rely on our monthly bill for profit, not receivers, contracts and lease/mirroring fees in my opinion. By bill I mean programming package


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

DIRECTV used to discuss the cost of the Plus HD DVR as part of their earnings calls. Back then, the manufacturing cost was approaching $200 from above as I recall.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

sunking said:


> Apple relies on iTune sales to make their profit. Directv should rely on our monthly bill for profit, not receivers, contracts and lease/mirroring fees in my opinion. By bill I mean programming package


Apple relies on sales of MP3s and Videos to make a profit on *iPhones*?? :nono2:

Why _*should*_ DIRECTV® charge only in the manner you state?


----------



## sunking (Feb 17, 2004)

Laxguy said:


> Apple relies on sales of MP3s and Videos to make a profit on *iPhones*?? :nono2:
> 
> Why _*should*_ DIRECTV® charge only in the manner you state?


Of course it does. Apple is in the hardware business primarily to push their itunes and app store sales. I don't have any Apple stuff but thought that whether you were buying music, video or apps it was via iTunes.

Just look at their earnings reports. It's been that way for years. Yes, they report impressive numbers on their hardware sales, but less manufacturing costs the profits from iTunes far exceed them.

Directv will charge whatever the they choose. I'm simply stating as a customer what I believe it should be. Or at the very least they should label on the bills exactly what the costs are. Because I know it doesn't cost $6/mo to 'mirror' a receiver.


----------



## evan_s (Mar 4, 2008)

sunking said:


> Apple relies on iTune sales to make their profit.


That's not accurate. Apple does make a small profit from iTunes by selling music, videos, apps, etc but they make much more profit selling the actual hardware. The iTunes store's biggest contribution is to keep people buying Apple stuff and not switching to a Zune or a Windows Phone or Android.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Let's make sure we keep this on an even keel. Be nice, discuss the topic and not each other.

Mike


----------



## ChicagoBlue (Apr 29, 2011)

davidpo said:


> That was labor genius probly even less. Material wise I have no clue and neither do you unless your high level at directv.


And I've been in the television distribution business for most of my life and know most of the execs at DTV. The HMC is more than $300 cost to them. A HD-DVR costs them more than $150. Even a SD box is still around $40 or $50 cost to them


----------



## davidpo (Apr 6, 2006)

ChicagoBlue said:


> And I've been in the television distribution business for most of my life and know most of the execs at DTV. The HMC is more than $300 cost to them. A HD-DVR costs them more than $150. Even a SD box is still around $40 or $50 cost to them


So you've seen in writing the actual cost of a dvr,and not just what some exec told you. All companies over inflate the costs of a item so they can charge more. Just like someone earlier posted it costs apple $196for a iphone in turn they sale one for $600. Thats a insane markup,but millions of drones will pay for it. I got my droid for free otherwise I'd kept my old dumb phone. Maybe one day the public at large will pull their collective heads out of their rear,and realize their being taken to the cleaners. If not this country along with the rest of the world is gonna be heading down a long dark road.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

We all have choices, and most of us make them with the cranium in fresh air. What is of value to me often bears little relationship to cost of manufacture or selling price. (including contract $$ as part of the purchase price.)
So, please don't knock the free market system because others make choices you don't.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

I don't know what planet some of you live on, but what an item costs to make many times have very little to do with what it sells for...and Apple products demand high dollars because the masses run out and buy every new version of every new Apple product as soon as they come out...and pay dearly for them. Its some of the most overpriced garbage out there...I end up setting up new ipads almost weekly for execs and then they complain that they cant do anything on it....but they HAD to have it.


----------



## TDK1044 (Apr 8, 2010)

To the OP; the answer is that they are not. It's the mark up that's expensive. It's a game of supply and demand.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

You just can not add up the sum of the parts and say X is what it should cost like you could for a burger or a pizza. There is no ongoing development or support costs invovled in consumables. DVRs, or any other DirecTv STBs are not consumables. There is continued costs associated with them regardless of age.

Of course the alternative would be to just give everyone HD DVRs or HR34s for nothing, but raise the monthly cost to offset the loss.

The current method, while not loved by all, is much less painfull than the alternative.


----------



## Xsabresx (Oct 8, 2007)

So after asking the question and reading the answers and doing more research, I am pretty sure it just comes down to the "proprietariness" of it. I can buy a DVD recorder - which is just a DVR with a DVD transport system instead of a hard drive - for $110-$150 (they can get pretty pricey as well) because there is competition in the market. With Directv you have to use their DVR so there is no competition in the market and this they can charge whatever they want.


----------



## ChicagoBlue (Apr 29, 2011)

davidpo said:


> So you've seen in writing the actual cost of a dvr,and not just what some exec told you. All companies over inflate the costs of a item so they can charge more. Just like someone earlier posted it costs apple $196for a iphone in turn they sale one for $600. Thats a insane markup,but millions of drones will pay for it. I got my droid for free otherwise I'd kept my old dumb phone. Maybe one day the public at large will pull their collective heads out of their rear,and realize their being taken to the cleaners. If not this country along with the rest of the world is gonna be heading down a long dark road.


:bang

Some of these people I have known for 20+ years and are dear friends. We don't lie to each other. I've worked for enough MSOs over the years and programmers to understand how this works. The iPhone comparison is foolish, totally different model.

The costs that I quoted for DTV hardware are very much in the ballpark. It is not in DTV's interest to overcharge for the hardware as they make their money on the programming.

All you have to do is look at their financial statements and their SAC costs which are over $800. Most of that is to cover the cost for the equipment (the dish, the receivers and the installation).


----------



## bldxyz (Aug 18, 2006)

Price has nothing to do with cost. 

Price has everything to do with what the market will bear, as represented by a company's pricing strategy.

This is basic economics. Don't concern yourself with what things cost to produce unless you are trying to evaluate the company for investment purposes.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

bldxyz said:


> Price has nothing to do with cost.
> 
> Price has everything to do with what the market will bear, as represented by a company's pricing strategy.
> 
> This is basic economics. Don't concern yourself with what things cost to produce unless you are trying to evaluate the company for investment purposes.


Agree with last paragraph, but the first sentence is flat out wrong for some major classes of retail items, and nearly all wholesale classes.

As to what the market will bear, don't forget elasticity of demand. There's a big curve for most discretionary items at retail. As an extreme example, Apple could have sold ten iPhones at $1,000,000, 50 at $250,000, but maybe none at $3,000, where it's too expensive for those of us who aren't in the luxury "gotta have one to be cool, or hip, or a showoff", but too cheap for those in that category.

No company charges what the market will bear for long, for many definitions of 'bear'.


----------

