Why is D* charging HR21 owners for AM21's?

[allenn]

Am I the only member of this forum that thinks D* should not be charging HR21 owners for the AM21? I originally ordered a HD DVR with OTA capability. I got an HR21-700 which has zilch OTA. I ordered an HD DVR for my bedroom and got a refurb HR20-100 which has OTA at no additional expense. I think it sucks that I have to pay for something that should have been included.

[spartanstew]

If I needed OTA, I wouldn't have accepted the HR21.

[ajc68]

If you call D* (don't order it online) and you are eligible, they will give it to you for free, or charge you and give your account a credit.

[Michael D'Angelo]

Removing the OTA tuners from the HD DVR's was a way for DIRECTV to cut cost on the units to save their self money and to allow customer to lease the unit for less.

Since a lot of customer don't need OTA tuners it benefits them to save money on something that don't need and won't use anyway and DIRECTV still has an option for customers that do need OTA tuners.

Remember the HD DVR's were $299 and the price was dropped to $199 when the HR21's came out. So if you get an HR21 for $199 and pay $50 for the AM21 you are still paying less than a lot of people did when the HR20's came out.

[David MacLeod]

Removing the OTA tuners from the HD DVR's was a way for DIRECTV to cut cost on the units to save their self money and to allow customer to lease the unit for less.

Since a lot of customer don't need OTA tuners it benefits them to save money on something that don't need and won't use anyway and DIRECTV still has an option for customers that do need OTA tuners.

Remember the HD DVR's were $299 and the price was dropped to $199 when the HR21's came out. So if you get an HR21 for $199 and pay $50 for the AM21 you are still paying less than a lot of people did when the HR20's came out.

does that really apply now? a new customer for 1 set price gets whatever they are sent. they have no choice, it could be a 20 or a 21 that shows up.

[Michael D'Angelo]

does that really apply now? a new customer for 1 set price gets whatever they are sent. they have no choice, it could be a 20 or a 21 that shows up.

Stock is very low on the HR20's so there is not a great chance of getting one and since the CSR's can't guarantee what unit you will get I guess that is why it is a set $199 price. Plus if you do get an HR20 it will be refurbished.

[David MacLeod]

Stock is very low on the HR20's so there is not a great chance of getting one and since the CSR's can't guarantee what unit you will get I guess that is why it is a set $199 price. Plus if you do get an HR20 it will be refurbished.

mine was new (man 10-2007) when I got it first week of February dropped shipped from D*. granted 3 months is a long time in this situation.
I'll be honest, I've always suspected (just an opinion, I have no proof) the 21 design was to allow charging for an add on product.

[Michael D'Angelo]

mine was new (man 10-2007) when I got it first week of February dropped shipped from D*. granted 3 months is a long time in this situation.
I'll be honest, I've always suspected (just an opinion, I have no proof) the 21 design was to allow charging for an add on product.

No, the HR21 was to definitely to cut cost on the unit for DIRECTV and their customers benefit. It allowed them to drop the price a $100 and it allowed customer to get the unit for a $100 less or $50 less now if you need to buy the AM21.

It seems like a lot of people need OTA tuners on this site but in reality I am sure their overall customer base is a lot lower percentage. I don't have any facts to support that except from a job I did for 5 years up until a few years ago. When I was at customers houses installing their systems and they had DIRECTV not to many of them had OTA's.

[David MacLeod]

lol, agreeing to disagree right ? :)

[dcmidnight]

Last month I got the wrong receiver sent to me after being promised, twice, by retention in recorded calls that I would get the HR20 during my upgrade. I emailed DTV yesterday about the AM21 and within a few hours received confirmation back that I would be sent one free of charge. I believe if you have upgraded in the last 90 days you are eligible for a free AM21.

[kokishin]

IMHO, it's bigger than this site. Directv's lack of satellite capacity to carry more digital locals (both main and sub channels), especially the HDTV locals has caused a renewed interest in OTA. Before, one could get just about all the analog locals in your area from Directv so OTA was not needed. If folks are investing big bucks in HDTV and surround sound systems, they want to get more than their HDTV big 3 network locals (CBS, NBC, ABC, and usually one other). For example, a lot us want to watch PBS in HD (I know, Directv says it's coming). Only way to get PBS HD today is OTA. Some HDTV independents carry pro and college sports broadcasts that can only be received OTA today. Someday when Directv is carrying all the HDTV locals in most of the DMA's, then OTA will not a big deal and the interest in the AM21 will diminish.


<clipped>
It seems like a lot of people need OTA tuners on this site but in reality I am sure their overall customer base is a lot lower percentage. I don't have any facts to support that except from a job I did for 5 years up until a few years ago. When I was at customers houses installing their systems and they had DIRECTV not to many of them had OTA's.

[LarryFlowers]

IMHO, it's bigger than this site. Directv's lack of satellite capacity to carry more digital locals (both main and sub channels), especially the HDTV locals has caused a renewed interest in OTA. Before, one could get just about all the analog locals in your area from Directv so OTA was not needed. If folks are investing big bucks in HDTV and surround sound systems, they want to get more than their HDTV big 3 network locals (CBS, NBC, ABC, and usually one other). For example, a lot us want to watch PBS in HD (I know, Directv says it's coming). Only way to get PBS HD today is OTA. Some HDTV independents carry pro and college sports broadcasts that can only be received OTA today. Someday when Directv is carrying all the HDTV locals in most of the DMA's, then OTA will not a big deal and the interest in the AM21 will diminish.

In the major markets what channels aren't being carried? I could be confused here, but my impression was that the must carry rules mean that if the local channels are covered in the market, then all of the locals are carried. I realize that there are subchannels, but so far they represent little interest in most markets. The PBS situation is being dealt with. I realize that many individuals on this site are interested... but real world? I you walked into a mall and asked 100 people about subchannels you would get 95 blank stares. Dont mistake the high level of awareness and expertise within this site as being representative of the real world.. it isn't.

In a marketplace where people buy HDTV's without any provisions for an HD signal source, where they are more concerned with "filling" the screen of their new giant tv screen than seeing the picture in it's proper format, subchannels and independents that are HD are minor issues.

I do believe that DirecTV should be supplying AM21's to customers who wanted OTA capability but where unable to get a DVR with OTA capability for free.

But DirecTV hasn't mis-read the marketplace, most of their clients wont miss the OTA tuner.

[glennb]

Since it's such a small amount of DIRECTV customers that supposedly need the AM21 I think the AM21 should be free to those customers that need it. If they don't have HD locals provided by DIRECTV and get an HR21 they should get the AM21 for free, not pay $50 for the AM21. If the customer gets the HD locals off the dish but wants the local HD sub channels, or local WB channel, or local PBS channel, or whatever then they can pay $50 for the AM21.

[David MacLeod]

fwiw, none of my locals are carried in HD so I use OTA extensively. and in extreme rural areas locals are not an option so OTA/external antenna are needed for news/weather.

[jimb726]

I dont see it as a big deal. They are a sat company after all. I dont think $50 dollars is unreasonable for a feature that a small number of people need. For the record, I have a HR-21 and I paid for it. And I got it in a day.

[Stuart Sweet]

Having paid $299 for my HR20-700 I would certainly have preferred paying just $249 for an HR21 and AM21.

[Earl Bonovich]

Having paid $299 for my HR20-700 I would certainly have preferred paying just $249 for an HR21 and AM21.

And those that don't want OTA... probably like only paying $199 or less for theirs without OTA hardware.

[Doug Brott]

And those that don't want OTA... probably like only paying $199 or less for theirs without OTA hardware.

That's the key .. the lower cost to DIRECTV has translated into a bit of an ala-carte to the customers. Those that need it pay a little more, those that don't pay a little less.

[inazsully]

Why did "D" come out with the HR20 followed so closely by the HR21? I understand the financial reasons for the HR21's birth, but why not just either drop the OTA feature on the HR20 or not have incorporated it in the first place? I mean, the OTA feature was not turned on in the HR20 for quite some time after it's release.

[tcusta00]

Why did "D" come out with the HR20 followed so closely by the HR21? I understand the financial reasons for the HR21's birth, but why not just either drop the OTA feature on the HR20 or not have incorporated it in the first place? I mean, the OTA feature was not turned on in the HR20 for quite some time after it's release.

Essentially they did just drop the OTA when they created the HR21. They also changed the case color and added a tiny bit bigger hard drive, but essentially it remains the same. They didn't reinvent the wheel, is that's what you're asking.

[Earl Bonovich]

Why did "D" come out with the HR20 followed so closely by the HR21? I understand the financial reasons for the HR21's birth, but why not just either drop the OTA feature on the HR20 or not have incorporated it in the first place? I mean, the OTA feature was not turned on in the HR20 for quite some time after it's release.

It was turned on 3 months after it's release to the general public.

HR21 was introduced to the market something like 6 or 9 months later...

The HR20 was in a design phase, and development for a very long time...
The HR21 didn't has as long as a design/development phase, because it built significantly off the work of the HR20.

Also at the time of the HR20 release, there were still a LOT of unknowns about the future launches of the SATs... as the HR21 was release, some of those unknowns where now known... and a lot less risk involved.

At the time of the HR20 release, there was only a fraction of the locals with HD as there were at the time of the HR21, as then today.

[glennb]

And those that don't want OTA... probably like only paying $199 or less for theirs without OTA hardware.

And those that call DIRECTV to order an HD DVR and get a refurbed HR20 for $199, they get a DVR with OTA without paying $50 extra.

[ajc68]

In the major markets what channels aren't being carried? I could be confused here, but my impression was that the must carry rules mean that if the local channels are covered in the market, then all of the locals are carried. I realize that there are subchannels, but so far they represent little interest in most markets. The PBS situation is being dealt with. I realize that many individuals on this site are interested... but real world? I you walked into a mall and asked 100 people about subchannels you would get 95 blank stares. Dont mistake the high level of awareness and expertise within this site as being representative of the real world.. it isn't.

First off, not everyone lives in a large market, and as you said nobody has PBS in HD. This isn't all about subchannels by a long shot. The carriage law states that if you carry one channel in a market you have to carry all of them doesn't go into effect until 2013 for satellite providers. Which means cities like Portland, OR will most likely not be getting CBS in HD until then. That's five years from now and nobody is allowed a satellite waiver there. Furthermore, there are other channels not being carried by D* in HD yet in several markets (PBS in all, as mentioned). And, as discussed in this thread, some markets have access to multiple locals and you can input two different ones into your DVR for full functionality. So I think this is more than a novelty item for people on this site at this point.

[Earl Bonovich]

First off, not everyone lives in a large market, and as you said nobody has PBS in HD. This isn't all about subchannels by a long shot. The carriage law states that if you carry one channel in a market you have to carry all of them doesn't go into effect until 2013 for satellite providers. Which means cities like Portland, OR will most likely not be getting CBS in HD until then. That's five years from now and nobody is allowed a satellite waiver there. Furthermore, there are other channels not being carried by D* in HD yet in several markets (PBS in all, as mentioned). And, as discussed in this thread, some markets have access to multiple locals and you can input two different ones into your DVR for full functionality. So I think this is more than a novelty item for people on this site at this point.

There is also still a tremedous amount to be ironed out regarding the latest "must carry" rules... Are they even finalized yet? Last I heard, they were just proposals...

And those proposals were questionable at best (specifically... what constitute HD... just because the station is cable, or if they are carrying a specific percentage of HD, ect... what about cases where the affiliate wants compensation, ect...) Does Must Carry also include the sub-channels

In a lot of the cities that don't have full coverage, it has more to do with contracts then it does bandwith and demand.

Here in Chicago, we are only missing two HD broadcasting channels. PBS and WCIU (which only broadcasts sports event in HD)...

[evan_s]

I think the biggest key is managing expectations. My fairly recent experience tells me that most people you talk to over the phone will still think they can get you a HR20 by just adding notes to the order or service request. My experience matches what I've read here and that it is really just a crap shoot and you get what you get. I have no problem saying that I do feel entitled to a FREE AM21 because I was promised the ability to receive over the air hd when signed up and had multiple attempts to get me a hr20. It's not just an extra to get sub channels and pbs for me or a back up against rain fade. It's the only way I can get CBS in HD since I happen to be lucky enough to live in the largest DMA that DirecTV doesn't have all the major networks in HD.

For those markets where DirecTV doesn't have all of the major 4 networks they should be prepared to either guarantee a hr20, which there system currently has no way to do, or provide a free am21 if you do get a hr21. If they aren't going to do that they need to very clearly set the expectation up front that if you don't get lucky and get a hr20 that you will need to spend 50$ to get an am21 to go with the hr21. However I feel HD service with out the major local channels is pretty poor and it should be free in those areas.

[harsh]

Why did "D" come out with the HR20 followed so closely by the HR21? I understand the financial reasons for the HR21's birth, but why not just either drop the OTA feature on the HR20 or not have incorporated it in the first place? I mean, the OTA feature was not turned on in the HR20 for quite some time after it's release.The HR20 needed OTA capability because DIRECTV's customers needed the capability. There was a rather large installed base of HR10 receivers that they needed to replace in a hurry to accomplish their MPEG4 goals and losing TiVo and OTA capability would have been an almost certain non-starter.

The failure to get the HD LIL going as soon as advertised also had a significant impact.

Fast forward to today where they still don't have anything implemented for PBS and notable "fussy" network affiliates the OTA capability remains of significant interest.

[tcusta00]

I think the biggest key is managing expectations.

This is the clearest and most devisive issue that faces all companies today. Don't do it and you're dead meat. Do it well and you thrive beyond your wildest dreams. Do something in between and you... well, you have DirecTV.

[inazsully]

The HR20 needed OTA capability because DIRECTV's customers needed the capability. There was a rather large installed base of HR10 receivers that they needed to replace in a hurry to accomplish their MPEG4 goals and losing TiVo and OTA capability would have been an almost certain non-starter.

The failure to get the HD LIL going as soon as advertised also had a significant impact.

Fast forward to today where they still don't have anything implemented for PBS and notable "fussy" network affiliates the OTA capability remains of significant interest.

Why go to the expense of tooling up to manufacture the HR21 when it seems that they could simply offer the HR20 with or without OTA with a $50 up charge for the with feature? I'm sure there is a logical financial reason but it just seems odd to the layman since both units are virtually identical in operation.

[jimb726]

Why go to the expense of tooling up to manufacture the HR21 when it seems that they could simply offer the HR20 with or without OTA with a $50 up charge for the with feature? I'm sure there is a logical financial reason but it just seems odd to the layman since both units are virtually identical in operation.

Different vendors, differnet places of manufacture, different hardware available. Functionally the HR2X family is very close to the same through the family, but there is still some features that work on the 20-700 that arent on the 20-100 or the 21-100, etc.

[Doug Brott]

Why go to the expense of tooling up to manufacture the HR21 when it seems that they could simply offer the HR20 with or without OTA with a $50 up charge for the with feature? I'm sure there is a logical financial reason but it just seems odd to the layman since both units are virtually identical in operation.

The HR21 is really exactly the HR20 without the OTA. It's not like the ATSC tuners can simply be pulled out or inserted as needed. If it was simply to charge the customer more because they had OTA, DIRECTV would be eating the dollars for every customer that didn't want OTA because the hardware (it's not just software) would also be in the receiver .. That was the whole point. DIRECTV wanted to save itself money by building a less expensive receiver .. some components were removed and the HR21 was created (along with an AM21 counterpart).

[dcmidnight]

I guess it depends on where you live but for me its a no brainer in needing OTA. There are 20 or so OTA channels/subchannels including multiple PBS feeds that DTV just wont carry.

[Ken S]

Why go to the expense of tooling up to manufacture the HR21 when it seems that they could simply offer the HR20 with or without OTA with a $50 up charge for the with feature? I'm sure there is a logical financial reason but it just seems odd to the layman since both units are virtually identical in operation.

Because they have to pay a license fee on every ATSC tuner they make whether the customer uses it or not. IIRC the license fee is $10/tuner or $20 for an HR20.

[tonyd79]

First, let me say, as a big proponent of OTA capability for DirecTV that the HR21/AM21 solution is a win-win.

The overall cost went down to both DirecTV and the customer (the $249 versus $299 for DVR with OTA) and, as Earl pointed out, the cost went from $299 to $199 for those who didn't want OTA.

Now, about OTA itself. It is for sure NOT just about sub-channels at this point still. It is about MAJOR stations in MAJOR cities. How many cities have the CW in HD? Very, very few. And we still have the PBS issue. And we will always have contract issues. Then throw in the subs, you still have a lot of available programming not covered.

To assume that all major channels even in "major" markets are covered is not addressing reality at this point. Granted, when D11 is up and running we should see better LiL coverage but there is still an issue today and it will take time for it to get resolved even with D11.

As I said, the AM21 is a great solution. It gets people what they want.

[jimb726]

Because they have to pay a license fee on every ATSC tuner they make whether the customer uses it or not. IIRC the license fee is $10/tuner or $20 for an HR20.
Yikes, even if you go on the high side and say 50% of the users need a tuner, man a 50% savings is huge. Not hard to see why they went down that path.

[jsmuga]

And those that don't want OTA... probably like only paying $199 or less for theirs without OTA hardware.

I am one of those that have no interest in OTA... the $199 as opposed to $299 was very nice considering I leased 5.

[allenn]

If you call D* (don't order it online) and you are eligible, they will give it to you for free, or charge you and give your account a credit.

I called D*, but the CS said $50 for an AM21. I have an HR21-700; D* service since early 1990's; and the monthly service billing is around $130. I guess I am not eligible! Must be some other trick to get an AM21.

[bwaldron]

Am I the only member of this forum that thinks D* should not be charging HR21 owners for the AM21? I originally ordered a HD DVR with OTA capability. I got an HR21-700 which has zilch OTA. I ordered an HD DVR for my bedroom and got a refurb HR20-100 which has OTA at no additional expense. I think it sucks that I have to pay for something that should have been included.

You're probably not the only one.

However, I am fine with them providing and charging for the AM21 for those who desire/use OTA (and I am one of them), given that the cost of the HD-DVR lease wen down $100 at the same time.

[Bill Broderick]

And those that don't want OTA... probably like only paying $199 or less for theirs without OTA hardware.

That's true. But many of us ended up paying $299 for our HR21's. When the HR21 was introduced, DirecTV probably should have immediately priced it $50 less than the HR20 and then give people the option of getting the unit that best met their needs.

What really stinks is that this new 90 day rule for getting free AM21's is pretty consistent with the time that the price of the HR21 dropped from $299 to $199. So, essentially people who paid a premium for the HR21 are still required to pay an additional price for the AM21, while the people who already got the HR21 at a discount are getting another break.

[Upstream]

How does it work with the Protection Plan?

If you have an HR20 which fails, and you get it replaced under the Protection Plan, and they send you an HR21, then do they also send you a free AM21 to give you the OTA capability you lost? Or do you have to pay for the AM21?

[kokishin]

$10 (not $20) for HR20.

ATSC License Terms: ATSC Receiver Products
Royalty of $5.00 for each ATSC Receiver Product
Includes the right to make, have made, sell, offer for sale, import, and for an End User to use ATSC Receiver Products
Coverage from December 24, 1996
Royalties payable on products from January 1, 1998




Because they have to pay a license fee on every ATSC tuner they make whether the customer uses it or not. IIRC the license fee is $10/tuner or $20 for an HR20.

[hasan]

And those that don't want OTA... probably like only paying $199 or less for theirs without OTA hardware.

Not only does this make sense, but in addition, let's drop the illusion that the AM21 would ever be "free". Someone is paying for R&D, as well as hardware. It is either spread over all paying customers, or eaten by the stockholders...but someone is paying for it. (and when is the last time you saw stockholders eat anything but caviar?)

Since the demand level is low (in terms of percentage of users, probably less than 10%), and the price is equally low, and the amount saved for the majority of customers is tangible, there is no reason at all to object to the business decision of charging a nominal fee for the AM21.

A side benefit is the tuner in the AM21 is superior to the HR20 series OTA tuner.

We need to give credit where credit is due, and stop looking a gift horse in the mouth. 49 bucks for a quality, fully integrated, DVR'd OTA tuner is a great deal.

As I have stated several times before, "some people can't take yes for an answer."

For a period of time we had no ota, even though it was promised right on the box. Then we got it, and it didn't work very well. Then it improved, and some of us discovered how to optimize its performance. Then we started losing it (HR20 production limited), then we lost it for the future (no OTA commitment for the HR21), then, after much howling and hand-wringing (I was chief among the howlers, btw) we were promised a solution.

D* is delivering! We have a tuner, it is very good and fully integrated at a reasonable price. I, for one, am happy to take D*'s response as a resounding YES

It it true, the AM21 isn't "here" yet, but several of us are testing it, and no one (other than people who are given to be disappointed no matter what D* does) should be unhappy with the AM21 as it will be delivered. The testing has gone very, very well.

...and I reiterate, nothing is free, and deluding oneself into believing that it is, speaks volumes to the validity of the initial complaint.:) With respect to the AM21, you are going to pay for it (if you want it), self-delusions aside.

We can debate price and performance, as well as availability all we like, but "free", if believed, is delusionary at best and disingenuous at worst.

[tcusta00]

Not only does this make sense, but in addition, let's drop the illusion that the AM21 would ever be "free". Someone is paying for R&D, as well as hardware. It is either spread over all paying customers, or eaten by the stockholders...but someone is paying for it. (and when is the last time you saw stockholders eat anything but caviar?)

Since the demand level is low (in terms of percentage of users, probably less than 10%), and the price is equally low, and the amount saved for the majority of customers is tangible, there is no reason at all to object to the business decision of charging a nominal fee for the AM21.

A side benefit is the tuner in the AM21 is superior to the HR20 series OTA tuner.

We need to give credit where credit is due, and stop looking a gift horse in the mouth. 49 bucks for a quality, fully integrated, DVR'd OTA tuner is a great deal.

As I have stated several times before, "some people can't take yes for an answer."

For a period of time we had no ota, even though it was promised right on the box. Then we got it, and it didn't work very well. Then it improved, and some of us discovered how to optimize its performance. Then we started losing it (HR20 production limited), then we lost it for the future (no OTA commitment for the HR21), then, after much howling and hand-wringing (I was chief among the howlers, btw) we were promised a solution.

D* is delivering! We have a tuner, it is very good and fully integrated at a reasonable price. I, for one, am happy to take D*'s response as a resounding YES

It it true, the AM21 isn't "here" yet, but several of us are testing it, and no one (other than people who are given to be disappointed no matter what D* does) should be unhappy with the AM21 as it will be delivered. The testing has gone very, very well.

...and I reiterate, nothing is free, and deluding oneself into believing that it is, speaks volumes to the validity of the initial complaint.:) With respect to the AM21, you are going to pay for it (if you want it), self-delusions aside.

We can debate price and performance, as well as availability all we like, but "free", if believed, is delusionary at best and disingenuous at worst.

I just had to quote the whole thing because it needs more thread real estate here.

:righton: Bravo! :righton:

[kokishin]

You distorted my point. I was primarily responding to what Michael D'Angelo said: "It seems like a lot of people need OTA tuners on this site but in reality I am sure their overall customer base is a lot lower percentage".

Percentage wise, he may be correct. However, Directv did not create AM21 for DBSTalk.com members. Directv is competing against cable which carries all locals for the markets they serve.

Using your mall scenario, try walking into a mall and asking 100 people: "you can subscribe to Directv and get only four locals in HD and no subchannels (even if they do not know what subchannels are) or you can subscribe to Comcast and get ALL your HD locals as well as your other local stations" - you might find these people who lack this site's expertise might think cable has more to offer.

PBS situation is just a press release at this point. Can't receive Austin City Limits in HD or the documentary "Carrier" in HD from a press release. If I want to watch San Jose Sharks in HD on the Ch.36 (San Jose, CA independent), it requires OTA HD.

The point I was trying to make is that until Directv can offer all HD locals (and for those that care - the local subchannels) the AM21 should be a popular unit.

I never commented on whether AM21 should be free or otherwise.

One additional thought: I don't understand why Directv couldn't have done a better job of synchronizing the development and release schedule of the AM21 with respect to the HR21 development and release schedule.



In the major markets what channels aren't being carried? I could be confused here, but my impression was that the must carry rules mean that if the local channels are covered in the market, then all of the locals are carried. I realize that there are subchannels, but so far they represent little interest in most markets. The PBS situation is being dealt with. I realize that many individuals on this site are interested... but real world? I you walked into a mall and asked 100 people about subchannels you would get 95 blank stares. Dont mistake the high level of awareness and expertise within this site as being representative of the real world.. it isn't.

In a marketplace where people buy HDTV's without any provisions for an HD signal source, where they are more concerned with "filling" the screen of their new giant tv screen than seeing the picture in it's proper format, subchannels and independents that are HD are minor issues.

I do believe that DirecTV should be supplying AM21's to customers who wanted OTA capability but where unable to get a DVR with OTA capability for free.

But DirecTV hasn't mis-read the marketplace, most of their clients wont miss the OTA tuner.

[tcusta00]

I was also looking for the hidden message in the bold words... I think I found it, too!

and great hasan is delivering. no ota are nothing. YES, Earl Bonovich!

Yep, this is really how my mind thinks, folks!

[Ken S]

$10 (not $20) for HR20.

ATSC License Terms: ATSC Receiver Products
Royalty of $5.00 for each ATSC Receiver Product
Includes the right to make, have made, sell, offer for sale, import, and for an End User to use ATSC Receiver Products
Coverage from December 24, 1996
Royalties payable on products from January 1, 1998

Yes, you're correct. $5/tuner. Posted that long ago when MPEGLA announced the fees and this discussion originally came up and I guess my mind is just fading faster than I feared.

[huskerhead]

Removing the OTA tuners from the HD DVR's was a way for DIRECTV to cut cost on the units to save their self money and to allow customer to lease the unit for less.

Since a lot of customer don't need OTA tuners it benefits them to save money on something that don't need and won't use anyway and DIRECTV still has an option for customers that do need OTA tuners.

Remember the HD DVR's were $299 and the price was dropped to $199 when the HR21's came out. So if you get an HR21 for $199 and pay $50 for the AM21 you are still paying less than a lot of people did when the HR20's came out.

The price was dropped to $199 but they started charging $99 for install for existing customers so it basically is still a $299 machine.

[jimb726]

The price was dropped to $199 but they started charging $99 for install for existing customers so it basically is still a $299 machine.

Not true, because you now have the self install option. They would not ship you just the unit in the past, they required a technician to do it. Now you can just have the unti delivered to your house, or you can CHOOSE to pay the 99 dollars and have it installed for you.

[johnck78]

In the major markets what channels aren't being carried? I could be confused here, but my impression was that the must carry rules mean that if the local channels are covered in the market, then all of the locals are carried.

Don't forget all of us LIN markets. I am missing CBS and FOX!

[huskerhead]

Not true, because you now have the self install option. They would not ship you just the unit in the past, they required a technician to do it. Now you can just have the unti delivered to your house, or you can CHOOSE to pay the 99 dollars and have it installed for you.

But it was free for professional install when the HR-21 was $299. Now that it's $199 professional install is $99. Net savings is $1.00.

[jacmyoung]

Look everyone, you can get the AM21 free if you just call D*, and if the first line CSR has no clue, talk to a manager, or ask to be switched to the retention department, they will ship you the AM21s for free.

I hope we can all be happy now:)

[clotter]

If you call D* (don't order it online) and you are eligible, they will give it to you for free, or charge you and give your account a credit.

I just called and ordered the (free) AM21. Thanks! I was just about to order online when I caught this thread.

[harsh]

However, I am fine with them providing and charging for the AM21 for those who desire/use OTA (and I am one of them), given that the cost of the HD-DVR lease wen down $100 at the same time.The price didn't go down until after the cost went down (at least one person has pointed out that the HR21 cost them $299). It also must be noted that the competition's decidedly more hardware intensive receiver (ATSC tuner, two agile RF modulators, PIP, two remotes) has always had a $199 lease entry price. While the competition's receivers bring more revenue per month because of the DVR fee structure, DIRECTV always knew they had to get the price down to the $199 level.

[Getteau]

The price was dropped to $199 but they started charging $99 for install for existing customers so it basically is still a $299 machine.

Grrrrrr, don't get me started on this. I negotiated a $99 price for my second HR21 and when I got my next bill I was like WTF???? Call DTV back and told the CSR that there was no install and that the guy basically dropped off the HR21 and drove away. I also told him the only reason they did the install was because I was doing a swap out of an R-15 and because DTV wouldn't mail me an HR21. The CSR I talked to said no way on dropping the charge so I asked for retention right then and there. He transferred me to a very nice lady who dropped the $99 install charge without skipping a beat.

[bwaldron]

The price didn't go down until after the cost went down (at least one person has pointed out that the HR21 cost them $299). It also must be noted that the competition's decidedly more hardware intensive receiver (ATSC tuner, two agile RF modulators, PIP, two remotes) has always had a $199 lease entry price. While the competition's receivers bring more revenue per month because of the DVR fee structure, DIRECTV always knew they had to get the price down to the $199 level.

No question -- it certainly would have been better if the AM21 would have been available with the HR21.

[inazsully]

I'm sure some folks payed $299 for their HR20 but of the 30 or so people I know of that bought the HR20 a total of 0 payed $299. Some payed $199 but most payed $99. My neighbor called and wanted to up grade from their SD DVR to the HR2x and was told $199. She's switching to Dish when her lease runs out. I talked her into "D" last year but I can't talk her out of this next move.

[Ualdayan]

Remember the HD DVR's were $299 and the price was dropped to $199 when the HR21's came out. So if you get an HR21 for $199 and pay $50 for the AM21 you are still paying less than a lot of people did when the HR20's came out.

Hmm, I wonder if they messed up with me then because they charged me $299 and then gave me an HR21 instead. You're saying the $299 was for an HR20 and I should have only had to pay $199 for the HR21? It's a good thing I don't need OTA since the only benefit would be CW in HD.

[SDizzle]

When the HR20 FIRST came out it was $399!!!! That was what mine was in 9/06.

[kokishin]

I am not trying to rub salt in any wounds nor am I gloating, but I got my first HR20 in 9/06 for $19.95 S&H. They also threw in some substantial credits as well. It sucks [the deal you got].

When the HR20 FIRST came out it was $399!!!! That was what mine was in 9/06.

[gully_foyle]

When the HR20 FIRST came out it was $399!!!! That was what mine was in 9/06.When DirecTV first came out in 1994, the single-tuner SD box was $799, installation another $200. If you wanted local stations, you had to provide your own antenna -- not sat delivery option at all.

Now folks want 2 HD DVRs and OTA installed, and they want it for free. Jeez.

[kokishin]

What kind of deal did you get on your HR20?

When DirecTV first came out in 1994, the single-tuner SD box was $799, installation another $200. If you wanted local stations, you had to provide your own antenna -- not sat delivery option at all.

Now folks want 2 HD DVRs and OTA installed, and they want it for free. Jeez.

[Tom Robertson]

How does it work with the Protection Plan?

If you have an HR20 which fails, and you get it replaced under the Protection Plan, and they send you an HR21, then do they also send you a free AM21 to give you the OTA capability you lost? Or do you have to pay for the AM21?

My general understanding is that if you have a protection plan replacement of an HR20 (sometimes hr10-25) you will be eligible for a free AM21. You most likely have to remind the CSR at the time that you use OTA on the unit.

Cheers,
Tom

[Blurayfan]

My general understanding is that if you have a protection plan replacement of an HR20 (sometimes hr10-25) you will be eligible for a free AM21. You most likely have to remind the CSR at the time that you use OTA on the unit.

Cheers,
Tom
Tom, I can confirm the protection plan will include a FREE AM21 when an HR20 is swapped for a HR21. I did receive one for my swapped HR20, but I had to call and request it after the replacement was activated because DirecTV had no way of knowing which unit the tech would have on hand.

[Maruuk]

I had to fight D* for over an hour on the phone, but they finally agreed to ship me a free one. I paid my dues for it in hundreds of hours of HR20 hassles. They definitely owed me.

[gully_foyle]

What kind of deal did you get on your HR20?I got it for $99, but then it replaced the $1000 HR10 they made obsolete, so ...

[kokishin]

Ouch!

I got it for $99, but then it replaced the $1000 HR10 they made obsolete, so ...

[jimb726]

I got it for $99, but then it replaced the $1000 HR10 they made obsolete, so ...

Technology made it obsolete. And I assume that given you paid 1000 dollars for it you had it for at least 3 years. Oh and by the way it isnt obsolete, obsolete implies that it is useless, which that unit certainly is not. It has a great OTA tuner on it, it has a huge amount of SD recording capability, oh and it still gets several HD channels and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. So you got to keep it and continue to get value from it and for an additional 99 dollars you get new technology to be able to recieve the new channels. Yeah an absolutely terrible deal.:confused:

[mhfnet]

I originally requested an HR20 but received an HR21. When I heard the AM21 was out I asked for a free unit, which I thought I was getting. I guess they misunderstood me and I received a HR20-100. Question is should I keep the HR20-100 or try to get an AM21? Other that the pain of setting up all automatic recordings and losing the recordings I saved, will a HR20-100 perform just as well as a HR21 with an AM21?

[bwaldron]

will a HR20-100 perform just as well as a HR21 with an AM21?

If the HR20 properly picks up the OTA channels you need, I'd personally just as soon keep it -- nicely matched as the AM21 & HR21 are, one box rather than two is preferable IMHO. Otherwise, if you're on the fringe in terms of reception, the AM21's ATSC tuners may do a better job.