DVR Chatter

It's nice to have the option there, but I personally will not be paying to view I show I could record on my DVR. I guess if the show was really important to me, and show how I missed it, I guess I would pay the $.99 to watch it.

jganyard wrote:

I'm guessing that the majority of people subscribed to Comcast's digital tier do not have DVRs.  This is likely targeted towards them.

Think like a business, though.  Businesses exist to make a profit.  Guaranteed (subscribed) money is better than Non-Guaranteed (ad hoc) money. 

Someone taking your DVR service is giving you 9.95 a month, month in month out, with the cash coming in not related in any way to their usage of your service.  They get addicted to DVR life, and continue paying you 9.95 a month every month for years and years and years.  These people have no use for your .99 OnDemand network offer.

Anyone who is looking to time shift shows with any consistency is going to go the DVR route.  So the max you're going to make off of anyone in any given month with this OnDemand scheme is likely LESS than 9.95. 

Say I'm the Average Joe.  I have no DVR.  If I care about my shows, I get to the TV to watch them.  If I don't care about my shows enough to get to the TV to watch them, I sure don't care enough about those shows to pay for them.  It just defies logic.

Plus, OnDemand has max capacity limits.  DVR does not.  Your upside for OnDemand is limited.

It seems like all the energy put into signing deals to be able to put these shows on demand would be better spent pushing the heck out of DVR service.

I saw some Comcast stats yesterday. It listed a very very low % of people with Comcast own a DVR. A higher % had access to on-demand.

It's not a bad idea. The average Joe doesn't not have a DVR, and if they miss a show it's nice to have a $.99 option to see your show that you missed.

Frank wrote:

Think like a business, though.  Businesses exist to make a profit.  Guaranteed (subscribed) money is better than Non-Guaranteed (ad hoc) money.  Someone taking your DVR service is giving you 9.95 a month, month in month out, with the cash coming in not related in any way to their usage of your service.  They get addicted to DVR life, and continue paying you 9.95 a month every month for years and years and years.  These people have no use for your .99 OnDemand network offer.

I call it DVR-crack.  Been addicted for 4 years myself. :-) I agree 100% there with you.  However there is just a majority of customers who will either never upgrade to a DVR, or for whom will not use DVR functions even if it was a part of their regular service.  I'm thinking Grannies here as well as people like my own mother (computer literate, mid-50s) that just is not interested in technology.  She'll use what she has to, doesn't use OnDemand but I'm betting she would if she missed one of her shows.  Heck, she's even looking for a new TV but refuses to buy an HD one even though I tell her that analog will be gone in a few years.  She doesn't want to pay extra for the TV, nor pay more to the cable co for HD service (which I did explain to her was optional).

Frank wrote:

It seems like all the energy put into signing deals to be able to put these shows on demand would be better spent pushing the heck out of DVR service.

I can assure you that Comcast wishes they could do that.  However I'm sure their numbers support the strategy they are using.  They're targeting multiple demographics which in my opinion is the right thing.

Afterthought... it's probably yet another selling point they can try to use on those stubborn analog customers that refuse to move up to a digital tier.  Every bit helps in that regard I'm sure.

Last edited by jganyard (11-08-2005 4:40:48 PM)

jganyard wrote:

I can assure you that Comcast wishes they could do that.  However I'm sure their numbers support the strategy they are using.  They're targeting multiple demographics which in my opinion is the right thing.

Wall Street is sour on Comcast because (among a number of reasons) their numbers rarely support their strategy.  I guess that's what happens when your daddy hands you a company to run.  How can you have a monopoly every place you do business, and still have only a 5.6% profit margin? The company is clearly very poorly run.

It's now available.  Hurry and pay $.99!

I guess NJ falls in either New York or  Philadelphia since we have it.  Who cares, I'm not paying $.99 when I can record it on the DVR or my trusty VHS.

It's a start, but $5.99 for the glorified student films that run on IFC isn't going to set my world on fire.

I am not sure that I will ever watch one either, but it sets a platform that they can build upon.  When we get The DaVinci Code in HD on the theatrical release date (or better yet, before), I will be quite happy.  I'd even pay $6.99. 

Patrick wrote:

CBS in HD for OnDemand is currently in testing with employees in the Richmond and Philadelphia markets.  I expect that it will become a standard part of their package when the next season rolls around.

Is that Richmond, VA?  I haven't seen any indications of that around here. If it does happen, I wonder if they will use the National Feed or local feed... The local feed is not broadcast in DD5.1.
I know someone that works for Comcast... I'll have to ask them this weekend.

JayMan (Richmond, VA)