Is DirecTV issuing/installing 320GB HR21s anymore?

[cartrivision]

Is DirecTV issuing/installing HR21s with 320GB disks anymore, or do all refurbished HR21s have their disks replaced with a 500GB disk (and maybe even get re-named as HR22s)?

[Stuart Sweet]

As far as I know, HR21s are not refurbished into HR22s. That being said, at this point HR21s are all pretty old and the likelihood of getting one is less and less every day.

[harsh]

I've seen a couple of HR21 installs recently. One was a new customer and one was a move to HD from an R16. I don't know what the size of the hard drives were.

I would think they would need to be very diligent about futzing with model numbers lest the CSRs become confused by model number combinations that shouldn't exist or are inconsistent with the IDs.

[BattleZone]

Refurb HR21s and even HR20s are still commonly being installed. DirecTV doesn't order new receivers if they have refurbs available, and I'm sure they send out tens of thousands a week to be installed. Inventory changes daily, so a tech may have brand new HR22s on Tuesday and only HR20s on Wednesday.

[cartrivision]

Refurb HR21s and even HR20s are still commonly being installed. DirecTV doesn't order new receivers if they have refurbs available, and I'm sure they send out tens of thousands a week to be installed. Inventory changes daily, so a tech may have brand new HR22s on Tuesday and only HR20s on Wednesday.

Yes, but are refurbs upgraded to 500GB disks before they go back out? I would think that DirecTV is inviting trouble if they are charging the same price for a 50 hour DVR as they do for a 100 hour DVR, and with the price of drives these days, it's really inexcusable to not upgrade all refurbs to 500GB disks.

[Stuart Sweet]

I do not believe refurbs are upgraded before they go out. I will pass your concerns on to our friends at DIRECTV; I'm sure they will be touched by your concern.

[cartrivision]

I would think they would need to be very diligent about futzing with model numbers lest the CSRs become confused by model number combinations that shouldn't exist or are inconsistent with the IDs.

That's hardly a problem. Updating their database that says that receiver XXXX is now an HR22, would be the trivial part of the task if they were actually changing the model number because of a disk upgrade.

[cartrivision]

I do not believe refurbs are upgraded before they go out. I will pass your concerns on to our friends at DIRECTV; I'm sure they will be touched by your concern.

With all deference to the sarcasm in your reply, I agree, they will most likely continue as if it isn't a legitimate concern.

Doing things that customers might regard as borderline fraud (like not disclosing to a customer that a 2x capacity DVR is available for the same price as the smaller capacity one they charged them for, or failing to properly disclose commitment extensions) seem to be SOP at DirecTV... at least until they get hit with a class action lawsuit.

[amorse2183]

I am still bothered that the cost of leasing refurbished equipment is the same as equipment that is brand new. even if the refurbished box works perfectly fine, it still doesn't justify the same price as new. i could go buy a used 2007 jeep cherokee or some other car tomorrow, but i'll never pay the same price as a 2010 model. It's like a restaurant took the leftovers from a 1/2 eaten steak and put it back on the menu the next night for the same price and only justified it by giving a new baked potato.

[CCarncross]

I am still bothered that the cost of leasing refurbished equipment is the same as equipment that is brand new. even if the refurbished box works perfectly fine, it still doesn't justify the same price as new. i could go buy a used 2007 jeep cherokee or some other car tomorrow, but i'll never pay the same price as a 2010 model. It's like a restaurant took the leftovers from a 1/2 eaten steak and put it back on the menu the next night for the same price and only justified it by giving a new baked potato.

Every tv provider that leases its equipment operates this way...if the refurb process is sound, there is absolutely no reason to not use the same boxes....if you want to avoid that you can always pay full retail purchase price for the boxes if you want....

[veryoldschool]

I am still bothered that the cost of leasing refurbished equipment is the same as equipment that is brand new. even if the refurbished box works perfectly fine, it still doesn't justify the same price as new. i could go buy a used 2007 jeep cherokee or some other car tomorrow, but i'll never pay the same price as a 2010 model. It's like a restaurant took the leftovers from a 1/2 eaten steak and put it back on the menu the next night for the same price and only justified it by giving a new baked potato.
I understand your concern, "but" what you call "the same price", is in fact the cost to lease, not buy and isn't the full purchase price to own, like your Jeep or restaurant example, so they don't fit.
A refurb could work better than a "new, untested" receiver.
A refurb could come from a closed account and be "as good as" new.
If I were to pay full price to own an item, I'd want it to be new, and if it was used, I'd want a discount on the purchase price.
Neither of these are happening here, since they're simply a lease.

[amorse2183]

I understand your concern, "but" what you call "the same price", is in fact the cost to lease, not buy and isn't the full purchase price to own, like your Jeep or restaurant example, so they don't fit.
A refurb could work better than a "new, untested" receiver.
A refurb could come from a closed account and be "as good as" new.
If I were to pay full price to own an item, I'd want it to be new, and if it was used, I'd want a discount on the purchase price.
Neither of these are happening here, since they're simply a lease.

if you read my post it clearly says the cost of leasing. the same thing still applies in my analogy. if you were to go lease a used car today you wouldn't be paying the same amount as a new one.

[veryoldschool]

if you read my post it clearly says the cost of leasing. the same thing still applies in my analogy. if you were to go lease a used car today you wouldn't be paying the same amount as a new one.The reply I quoted had nothing about lease. Were you leasing that half eaten steak? :confused:

[evan_s]

Yeah it was a little odd paying an up front lease fee for a receiver when I signed up but re-using refurbed hardware is hardly unique to DirecTV. I know Comcast in my area does it because I received a very old STB last time I had one from them. I'm pretty sure Dish and Verizon do too so here all of my options could provide me with a refurb.

The up front lease fee for DirecTV was high but for a HD DVR the monthly rental fee from comcast is 15.95 per month each + a 6.99 for each additional one beyond the first. This monthly fees quickly add up to more than DirecTV's 5$ per box fee.

[Beerstalker]

Try going to your cable company and telling them you want a brand new DVR, and you won't accept a used one. For that matter just try asking for a specific model, which they probably would ignore also.

This isn't a vehicle where the person leasing it before you may not have taken good care of it and lessened the long term usability. If the DVR breaks down you are not resposible for paying for repairs etc. They are leasing you a box to allow you to receive their programming and record it. All HD-DVRs have similar functionality so they are considered the same in the eyes of D*.

[O2BRich]

I just received another DVR for the bedroom on Friday and it was a HR21-100.

The capacity does not bother me. I have 3 DVR's now and with MRV (As long as it stays free) I have plenty of storage. If I want more I will just add and ESTA drive.

[amorse2183]

I understand your concern, "but" what you call "the same price", is in fact the cost to lease, not buy and isn't the full purchase price to own, like your Jeep or restaurant example, so they don't fit.
A refurb could work better than a "new, untested" receiver.
A refurb could come from a closed account and be "as good as" new.
If I were to pay full price to own an item, I'd want it to be new, and if it was used, I'd want a discount on the purchase price.
Neither of these are happening here, since they're simply a lease.

The reply I quoted had nothing about lease. Were you leasing that half eaten steak? :confused:


The very first sentence of my post was--

I am still bothered that the cost of leasing refurbished equipment is the same as equipment that is brand new.

[amorse2183]

Try going to your cable company and telling them you want a brand new DVR, and you won't accept a used one. For that matter just try asking for a specific model, which they probably would ignore also.

This isn't a vehicle where the person leasing it before you may not have taken good care of it and lessened the long term usability. If the DVR breaks down you are not resposible for paying for repairs etc. They are leasing you a box to allow you to receive their programming and record it. All HD-DVRs have similar functionality so they are considered the same in the eyes of D*.


I've done it with Comcast for cable modems for years when it was time to get another one. I know of at least 10 friends and family members who were able to request a new digital cable box from Comcast as well and got a new one without problems

[cartrivision]

I have no problem with the DVR's being leased. It helps keep costs down and is probably the reason that I've gotten so many free DVRs.

My comments were more about DirecTV selling their services based on a claim of a DVR capacity that is "two times more than cable" and failing to disclose to customers that even if they pay the full lease price for the supposed top of the line DirecTV DVR, DirecTV might provide a DVR with only half the capacity of what their advertising claims... while never disclosing that fact to the customer... and for the customers who figure out that they are in danger of being cheated, DirecTV's standard operating procedures don't even allow a customer to request a DVR with a recording capacity that matches their advertising claims.

If that isn't fraud, it's pretty close... it's certainly unethical.

[Stuart Sweet]

It's an advertising claim, and a vague one. I know there are some cable DVRs out there with 10 hours of HD, and certainly an HR21 beats that.

[cartrivision]

It's an advertising claim, and a vague one. I know there are some cable DVRs out there with 10 hours of HD, and certainly an HR21 beats that.

Actually, it's a very specific claim since DirecTV admits (at least in some places) what the claim is based on, and admits that the claim is only met by it's highest capacity DVRs... but while still failing to disclose that the customer may get a DVR with half that capacity (making it "the same as cable") while still being charged the same price as the larger capacity DVR, and while DirecTV fails to provide a standard operating procedure for a customer to insure that they get the advertised capacity DVR if they are smart enough to realize that they are about to get cheated.

[cartrivision]

I just received another DVR for the bedroom on Friday and it was a HR21-100.

The capacity does not bother me. I have 3 DVR's now and with MRV (As long as it stays free) I have plenty of storage. If I want more I will just add and ESTA drive.

The shortchanging on capacity doesn't really matter in my situation either, but for me it's because I view DirecTV's largest capacity DVR as way too small, so my smallest capacity DVR has a 1TB disk, while others have 2TB disks.

I knew when I was being shortchanged and didn't care, because that smaller disk goes completely unused anyway, but just because some people don't care, that doesn't change the fact that DirecTV is cheating some people who thought that they were getting what DirecTV advertised.

[veryoldschool]

Each to their own,
I've got the early DVR with 300 GB, and can't even get close to filling it up.
Clearly this is a "YMMV" topic/issue.

[cartrivision]

Each to their own,
I've got the early DVR with 300 GB, and can't even get close to filling it up.
Clearly this is a "YMMV" topic/issue.

Actually, it's more an ethical, legal, and "truth in advertising" issue. The fact that 300GB is big enough for some people is irrelevant.

[Stuart Sweet]

Until, or unless, you are prepared to post the entire legal basis of your argument, I ask that we return to topic.

Thank you.

[cartrivision]

Until, or unless, you are prepared to post the entire legal basis of your argument, I ask that we return to topic.

Thank you.

The topic was started because I think that if DirecTV is still deploying 320GB HD DVRs without disclosing that the deployed DVRs don't live up to their advertising claims, that that is some combination of unethical, false advertising, and fraud, so such discussion is completely on topic.

If you want me to fully litigate such opinions here in this thread, I'll have to get back to you later on that one. Is there an address where I should serve the papers before I continue to state my opinions? :confused:

[zuf]

In reference to the original topic: I upgraded to HD at the end of October. The "new" HD-DVRs that I was provided were both refurbished HR21-700s. Based on the recording time that I am getting with them, I believe it is safe to assume that neither had been upgraded to 500GB hard drives and most likely were the original 320GB drives.

So, in my area at least, the HR21s are still out there and they appear to still have 320GB drives.

[CCarncross]

It's so good to see how petty my fellow Americans can be, especially the Caly fornIA ones...makes me proud...if they are advertising up to 100 hours(which I believe they are), they can use any size hard drives they want in them...the courts have more important things to do than get filled up with trivial lawsuits about absolutely useless crap...

[amorse2183]

It's so good to see how petty my fellow Americans can be, especially the Caly fornIA ones...makes me proud...if they are advertising up to 100 hours(which I believe they are), they can use any size hard drives they want in them...the courts have more important things to do than get filled up with trivial lawsuits about absolutely useless crap...

and it's still amazing to me how many people are drinking the DirecTV Kool-Aid.

We still see the "directv is the best the prices are better look at how much dish or fios would be for the same kinds of hardware or channel packages!!" posts every day.
somebody posts they are not happy with the amount of recording time promised on the hd-dvr and then its a "well they didn't really mean that much, but since its better than cable, its still perfect!!" quotes.

[RobertE]

If anyone actually takes the time to do 30 seconds of research before making such BS claims that would have found this at www.directv.com

†Actual recording capacity varies depending on the type of programming being recorded. HD DVR Model HR22 or later required for maximum recording capacity.

Seems pretty clear to me. But then again, I don't have an axe to grind with the company over petty BS.

[amorse2183]

If anyone actually takes the time to do 30 seconds of research before making such BS claims that would have found this at www.directv.com



Seems pretty clear to me. But then again, I don't have an axe to grind with the company over petty BS.

I agree with you that it is quite clear. However, I have some family members who are not computer savvy enough to even manage that. Even if they did, when one hears a commercial or sees the big print ads, they might not remember the fine print. Now, the service certainly isn't cheap, and I think if you are going to spend hundreds of dollars on anything you should at least attempt a little research first.

But it still should be more prominently displayed or noted in any video or print ads. I bet if this were a credit card company and you were complaining about some stupid fee or policy you didn't know about when you applied for the card, you would be irate over the misleading advertising or sky high interest rates.

[CCarncross]

This reminds me of the sign on the door that says "Please use other door" and the guy still spends 2 minutes trying to get it open. It doesnt matter if you spell it out, there are people that will claim they have no knowledge of it...

To anyone thats not happy with D*, go to another service......OMG, what a concept....

If they really screw something up, I'm right there, but this petty crap is just ridiculous...

[cartrivision]

If anyone actually takes the time to do 30 seconds of research before making such BS claims that would have found this at www.directv.com

†Actual recording capacity varies depending on the type of programming being recorded. HD DVR Model HR22 or later required for maximum recording capacity.

Seems pretty clear to me. But then again, I don't have an axe to grind with the company over petty BS.

So exactly where and when do they disclose that the DVR that they provide for the customer (at no discount for a lower capacity model) does not meet their advertised claims? And exactly where do they disclose that their operating procedures don't allow a customer to insist that a DVR order be filled only by a HR22 or later that will fulfill the advertised claims?

In addition to those disclosure problems, there's the fact that the "†" designated footnote that you quoted above appears nowhere on some of their web pages where the capacity claim is made and the footnote is referenced.

The whole situation is about as clear as mud, despite your proclivity for defending DirecTV even when their actions are indefensible.

And contrary to your baseless insinuation, I have no axe to grind with DirecTV. I probably own more of the company than anyone here, but that doesn't mean that I support any means (including obvious deception and probable fraud) of increasing shareholder value... not to mention that such deceptive practices can come back to bite DirecTV in the a## and actually cost them (and shareholders) money in the long run.

[David MacLeod]

this is another damn plumb mast thread.

[amorse2183]

This reminds me of the sign on the door that says "Please use other door" and the guy still spends 2 minutes trying to get it open. It doesnt matter if you spell it out, there are people that will claim they have no knowledge of it...

To anyone thats not happy with D*, go to another service......OMG, what a concept....

If they really screw something up, I'm right there, but this petty crap is just ridiculous...

OK-

So now you say people are stupid and if they don't think just like you they should leave directv immediately? When are customers allowed to complain? When does a problem with your precious DirecTV go from petty to being a legitimate concern?

[RobertE]

So exactly where and when do they disclose that the DVR that they provide for the customer (at no discount for a lower capacity model) does not meet their advertised claims? And exactly where do they disclose that their operating procedures don't allow a customer to insist that a DVR order be filled only by a HR22 or later that will fulfill the advertised claims?

The HD DVRs offered meet the claims. You really got to love the wording of "up to". From time warners site:

Store Shows
Most DVRs can store up to 80 hours of standard-definition programming. An HD-DVR stores up to 35 hours of high-definition programming.

From comcast:

In general, you can store up to 60 hours of standard definition programming and up to 15 hours of high-definition programming on your DVR.

I couldn't find anything giving the recording time for the cox DVRs.

So, the HR20/21s are easily 2x that of comcasts DVRs, but do fall short of TWs claims. So they meet the claims in some markets. As for requesting a specific model? Come on, you've been around long enough to know that you can't. From a new customers point of view, they have no idea about different models, some now 4 years old. Get real. :rolleyes:


In addition to those disclosure problems, there's the fact that the "†" designated footnote that you quoted above appears nowhere on some of their web pages where the capacity claim is made and the footnote is referenced.

It's easy to see on www.directv.com if one opens their eyes.

I've pointed out where I think they meet their claims. It's your turn to SHOW where they are not? You up to doing that?


The whole situation is about as clear as mud, despite your proclivity for defending DirecTV even when their actions are indefensible.

And contrary to your baseless insinuation, I have no axe to grind with DirecTV. I probably own more of the company than anyone here, but that doesn't mean that I support any means (including obvious deception and probable fraud) of increasing shareholder value... not to mention that such deceptive practices can come back to bite DirecTV in the a## and actually cost them (and shareholders) money in the long run.

Riiiiiiiiiight. :rolleyes: Lastly, I never singled you out as having an axe to grind, but if your that vain to think it was all about you, then well...not sure what to say about that. :lol:

[Stuart Sweet]

I see this thread does not seem to be able to stay civil... so 1st warning. I'd rather have a civil conversation than close this one.

[TBlazer07]

OK-

So now you say people are stupid and if they don't think just like you they should leave directv immediately? When are customers allowed to complain? When does a problem with your precious DirecTV go from petty to being a legitimate concern?

When it affects him personally. :)

[Stuart Sweet]

Wow, from 1st warning to 2nd warning in record time. Just one more...

[TBlazer07]

Wow, from 1st warning to 2nd warning in record time. Just one more... I apologize, but you have to understand that BEFORE one sees your message/warning which was the last one posted a user could be on a different page of messages or it hasn't scrolled on the screen yet. This happens very often including this time. Besides, it was a ":)" .

[Crimson]

I see this thread does not seem to be able to stay civil... so 1st warning. I'd rather have a civil conversation than close this one.

Remaining civil, I have to point out that I do think you were the first person to take this thread in a negative direction:

I do not believe refurbs are upgraded before they go out. I will pass your concerns on to our friends at DIRECTV; I'm sure they will be touched by your concern.

Just saying.. :) You might have to warn yourself. :lol:

[sigma1914]

Remaining civil, I have to point out that I do think you were the first person to take this thread in a negative direction:

I do not believe refurbs are upgraded before they go out. I will pass your concerns on to our friends at DIRECTV; I'm sure they will be touched by your concern.

Just saying.. :) You might have to warn yourself. :lol:

Funny & snarky doesn't mean it's negative.

[amorse2183]

Funny & snarky doesn't mean it's negative.

if it were me who made the comment, it would be negative. somebody who has more posts (and stays pro-Directv), and its merely snarky.