DirecTV, we should have a choice of ownership

[Lex]

It came to my attention last year, that if you wished to receive the new local high definition channels through DirecTV, that you must now LEASE a new HDDVR, instead of buying as we could previously through vendors such as TiVo brand products.

Myself, TiVo had become as much a part of my daily TV life, as TV itself, and I really resent having that right taken away from me. I Believe that we as consumers should have a choice where hardware is concerned, and we should have a choice of ownership.

If you feel the same, please report this voilation of your rights to the Federal Trade Commission Bureau of Consumer Rights here: It is unfortunate that we have to fill out so much detailed information to register a complaint, but I guess that's how it is if you want your voice heard. I did.

https://rn.ftc.gov/pls/dod/wsolcq$.startup?Z_ORG_CODE=PU01

Here is what I wrote:

(Product Name: Leased Satellite TV box) I first became a DirecTV customer in 1997. From 1997 to 2007 I was able to choose from several brands of satellite based receivers to "PURCHASE" for use on the DirecTV satellite network, and pay a monthly service fee for my subscription.

In 2007, I had a satellite receiver tear up, suddenly, I find that you can no longer purchase any hardware for satellite reception. You must now LEASE a satellite box for 5.00 a month, and pay that 5.00 a month forever. I can no longer own equipment, and by way of cutting out other manufacturers such as Philips, Sony, Toshiba, etc... I no longer have a competitive choice. Therefore, I have to enter into a tying agreement with DirecTV for a leased satellite receiver.

Additionally, in 2007, DirecTV introduced LOCAL CHANNEL High Definition Broadcasts. They did so in such a way that no OLD receivers could now receive these broadcasts. You must now lease a new receiver directly from DirecTV if you wish to receive major networks in high definition.

I believe that DirecTV's efforts are purely anti-competitive, with desire to eliminate all other manufacturers from the Satellite business of DirecTV. I like DirecTV overall, have been satisfied with the service, but I still believe I should have a "choice" where equipment is concerned, and be able to purchase TiVo branded, DirecTV satellite receivers just as I did 5 years ago, only for high definition. TiVo would make them I am sure, if DirecTV didn't prevent them from doing so.

I believe I do have rights of ownership of my equipment, and DirecTV has taken those rights away from me.

[H.T.C]

It would create or make a huge difference if every member here or sat tv owner were lobbiests since money influences politics but alas they are not and its probable unless (corporations) or those in office lose their jobs or money then no change (sometimes) can or will occur.

There is of course boycotting but consumers will not do this or wait long enough for it to work.sorry for being cynical but government for the people,by the people,of the people does not seem to be the same anymore.

[littlesaint]

I haven't moved to the new MPEG4 receiver yet. I get locals OTA, but it is disheartening to see this. However, I don't know if DirecTV is that out of line here. They are not a monopoly, so they have a certain amount of liberty in defining how they operate their business. Similar to Apple only allowing iTunes songs to play on an iPod. Tivo and DirecTV parted ways long ago, and I don't think either has much interest in licensing the other. As someone who occasionally has to provide customer support, I can say it is much easier to deal with a single, in-house hardware platform than have to deal with multiple platforms and 3rd party services.

[H.T.C]

I haven't moved to the new MPEG4 receiver yet. I get locals OTA, but it is disheartening to see this. However, I don't know if DirecTV is that out of line here. They are not a monopoly, so they have a certain amount of liberty in defining how they operate their business. Similar to Apple only allowing iTunes songs to play on an iPod. Tivo and DirecTV parted ways long ago, and I don't think either has much interest in licensing the other. As someone who occasionally has to provide customer support, I can say it is much easier to deal with a single, in-house hardware platform than have to deal with multiple platforms and 3rd party services.

That does makes sense but it is also understandable that consumers what choice.

[littlesaint]

That does makes sense but it is also understandable that consumers what choice.

Can't argue there. I remember when I first added my cable Internet service. The modem is $4 a month. Instead I bought one for $40. Same modem still works today, 6 years later. I can see not allowing Tivo, or maybe going with a single vendor, but you shouldn't be forced to lease something indefinitely.

[BasementJax]

I own two older DirecTV receivers and lease one newer DVR for the MPEG4 channels. I was a big fan of the old "invest in the receiver with the feature set you want model". Being forced to pay outrageous (IMO) lease prices was one of the driving factors in my switch from cable several years back.

That said, I do understand why they went to the lease model. The purchase the equipment once and that's that concept appeals to many of us but actually kept many potential customers from making the switch when digital cable services were slow to roll out. I actually overheard many times in big box stores..."What do you mean I have to spend $120 on equipment just to subscribe to DirecTV service!!?" It never occurs to that type of customer that they'd be paying more than $120 in lease fees in 1 years time.

I ran the numbers and it's still much cheaper in my area to lease my SAT DVR than a cable DVR lease would be. I just wish they had left us consumers with a choice. All they really need to do is come up with a reasonable price to buy out of the lease and purchase the gear.

[Alaric]

However, I don't know if DirecTV is that out of line here.

Yeah! In fact , you should have to lease a proprietary TV as well ! With a sensor in it that cuts your service if it "sees" a flashbulb indicating you took a picture of a screen shot-and sign a consent form allowing the MPAA to search your home for "hacked" DVRs , and satellite surveillance to tell if you're watching his TV without paying extra , and have to shop at the Company Store , and dig coal on Sundays......where does it end? At what point do we tell these overbearing , greedy #&*@#s to piss up a rope?

When corporate greed pisses me off I vote with my wallet. I appreciate the convenience factors involved , but I've got a short fuse.

[littlesaint]

Yeah! In fact , you should have to lease a proprietary TV as well ! With a sensor in it that cuts your service if it "sees" a flashbulb indicating you took a picture of a screen shot-and sign a consent form allowing the MPAA to search your home for "hacked" DVRs , and satellite surveillance to tell if you're watching his TV without paying extra , and have to shop at the Company Store , and dig coal on Sundays......where does it end? At what point do we tell these overbearing , greedy #&*@#s to piss up a rope?

When corporate greed pisses me off I vote with my wallet. I appreciate the convenience factors involved , but I've got a short fuse.

:E

If you want to slide down the slippery slope, I guess that's your choice, but all they are doing is requiring you to use their equipment for their service. It's a pretty common practice these days, and if you don't like it, I'm sure DISH or your local cable company would be more than happy to have you. Only problem is they all have pretty much the same requirements. If you want full service, you're going to have to use their equipment.

[Hdale85]

But with Dish at least you can purchase the equipment.

[Alaric]

:E

If you want to slide down the slippery slope, I guess that's your choice, but all they are doing is requiring you to use their equipment for their service. It's a pretty common practice these days, and if you don't like it, I'm sure DISH or your local cable company would be more than happy to have you. Only problem is they all have pretty much the same requirements. If you want full service, you're going to have to use their equipment.

Or I can use one of the dozen or so software applications I have that will rip the bloody lungs out of anything with a usb port.....did I say that out loud? "Prank caller , prank caller"......

[JohnA]

If you want to slide down the slippery slope, I guess that's your choice, but all they are doing is requiring you to use their equipment for their service.

Then the equipment costs should also be part of the service! When there more or less is no other option to buy or even use any other brand of quipment with their service, just how is it fair that they also have a extra added cost to lease their required equipment? And then they also have the guts to try and sell you a optional service plan to cover equipment breakdowns. Yeah right! If I don't own it, just why should I pay to fix their equipment if it quits working? They own it, not me, so they can darn well also pay to fix it or replace it. If you pay rent for a apartment and the buildings furnace conks out, they don't try and charge you to fix or replace the furnace. And they also don't charge the renters a furnace lease fee or try to sell them optional furnace insurance.

[Foxman]

I just recently encountered this very thing as I just upgraded to D*'s HD DVR from the old SD DVR. I didn't initially realize I was not the owner until I read a similar thread over at the S&V forum where at least one other long time D* customer switched back to cable. I for one will not switch back to cable and now after seeing how much better D*'s HD service is than I expected, I will likely just live with it. I do however intend to express my displeasure via that link about my lost ability to own.

One reason why I held off of the HD service was because the HD DVR was so over priced...well I guess now it isnt a price issue as much as an ownership one and that is one that I am sure a LOT of people miss the point about.

Just my .02

[Lex]

I got a reply from the Federal Authorities that they had sent my complaint to local, state, and such authorities. I don't know if I accomplished anything, but at least I tried.

I agree, right of ownership, we deserve it. I admit, I didn't like the price of my last HD TiVo units @ 1K each, but at least we should have the choice. As to going back to cable, not really an option until Comcastic has competition.

I think the thing that borders on unfair competition is the fact that they did allow manufacture of DTV boxes, but then the company tells you you can not only not own their boxes, but now we got you, you can't own ours either. This makes it an anti-competitive and tying agreement, IMO.

[Chris D]

Yeah, interesting. I'm actually about to sign up for satellite TV, and going to get a bidding war going between D* and E*. D*'s latest and greatest HD DVR just came out, a pro model that's rackmountable and stuff. It's big $$$, but it looks like it's the only model that's ownable now.

[Hdale85]

Rack mountable? Wow..... link!?!?!?

[Chris D]

Go here:

http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?PROD=HR21PRO&xzoom=Large#xview

Or here:

http://www.fsiwebs.com/shopcart3/SC_ProdView.asp?LinkID=Re2rV5qFYM8KX_pQelYtsrE0lM2Q5yWi:5tMocL0JKfdbwcs0s:RwSL_DJP6Welwry0pQeygLu0-

Or download this:

http://www.valueelectronics.com/images/pdf/HR21%20pro_SpecSheet.pdf

It's got some cool stuff, like optical HDMI over fiber optics for long runs. Just big $$$, especially after you add on some more of the fiber optics equipment.

[Lex]

but I see you still don't technically own it even after paying 600.00 for it??????? That's a load of bullsh..

[Chris D]

Apparently, the HR-21 PRO model specifically is the only one that you do end up owning as a purchase, FWIW. All others are just leases. You don't save any money in lease fees, or anything, though. Same charges, and you just pay more up front.

[Lex]

how can they charge you a lease fee if you OWN it???

But FYI, this is what it says:

As of 3/1/06 DIRECTV® now requires a 24 month commitment and all equipment must be returned to DIRECTV® if customer cancels service with DIRECTV®

Not that it would do you any good without DTV service.

[Foxman]

Not that it would do you any good without DTV service.

I guess that is a good point. I mean it isnt as if I can use it for anything other than maybe the Hard Drive. Still though, if I want to own it and avoid a monthly lease charge, I should be able too.

[Chris D]

I went ahead and signed up for new DirecTV service. (can't afford the PRO model, though) Getting two new DVR's. They're charging one package service price, $72.99 for the HD DVR plus package. There's an additional $4.99 charge for the 2nd receiver per month. But no lease fees. Would have been the same price if I went with the DVR PRO model, too.