Help me to understand something regarding lease v. own

[996911]

Switching back to DTV later this year.....

Ok, so I was with DTV a while back for several years and the equipment I used (which I still have) I had to purchase. Now it appears that the equipment is now leased. The equipment cost are basically the same.....(ie, free basic receiver, 99 HD, 299 DVR, etc). I have no problem shipping them the box should I ever quit service since I have no use for it after the fact, but I am just trying to understand what the lease thing is all about and how this is different for the consumer other than having to give it back. Is this supposded to benefit the consumer in some way? Does this mean it works much like how a cable company treats their equipment replacement, etc?

Many Thanks!

[harsh]

There are numerous threads here about leasing versus buying and the topic has been covered pretty thoroughly. Please use the search function to find what you're looking for.

[bobnielsen]

One difference is that if the receiver breaks it will be replace whether or not you have the protection plan (you will pay shipping without protection after the warranty period however). Often the "lease upgrade" fees will be reduced or waived (I was offered a free SD DVR or HD receiver and $100 discount on the HD DVR).

[996911]

There are numerous threads here about leasing versus buying and the topic has been covered pretty thoroughly. Please use the search function to find what you're looking for.

Many thanks for your input Bob.

Apparently user Harsh has that name for a reason. It took him more energy to be an ass that it did to kindly offer an answer to somebody as new as I am (<10 posts). At least he used the word please.

I've never understood why people feel the need to be like that when hiding behind a keyboard. FYI mister Harsh......I did use the search function and got something like 10 pages of hits when using the term "lease". And of those threads listed I didn't see anything immediately that could answer my question and figured it was just as easy to ask a question like mine to get a simple answer rather than read every thread for such a simple answer to some of your more experienced guys.

Try to lighten up on those that aren't vets of this site like yourself. By your response you have asked that NOBODY ever ask another question that has been asked before. Nice.

[hambonewd]

many times a member will provide a link to a thread that covers the topic being asked.

anyway this forum is an awesome resource for information. we are all nice here too for the most part. so i hope you are not going to turn away because of a negative reaction. welcome to the forums. you'll like it here i promise.

[JeffBowser]

I'm with you there. I nearly got driven out of the Polk speaker forum when I dared express a contrary opinion, and asked what they thought was a dumb question. Seems internet forums in general bring out the worst in some people. FYI, If ya ever go to the Polk speaker forum, by the way, don't ever question the conventional wisdom of paying top dollar for fancy speaker wire. :lol:

Many thanks for your input Bob.

I've never understood why people feel the need to be like that when hiding behind a keyboard.
Try to lighten up on those that aren't vets of this site like yourself. By your response you have asked that NOBODY ever ask another question that has been asked before. Nice.

[CCarncross]

The H20 HD receiver is about $300 or more to buy.
The HR20 HD DVR is about $800 to buy. You already know the typical lease fees. Plus if you lease, D* replaces them for at most S&H if they go belly up. You replace them i at your expense if they go belly up if you choose to buy. WIth very few exceptions, it makes no sense to buy these things today.

[Jeremy W]

Apparently user Harsh has that name for a reason. It took him more energy to be an ass that it did to kindly offer an answer to somebody as new as I am (<10 posts). At least he used the word please.
If you're in the DirecTV forums, feel free to ignore harsh's posts. He's a Dish Network subscriber, and only comes over here to troll.

[996911]

Thanks so much for all the responses!


many times a member will provide a link to a thread that covers the topic being asked.

anyway this forum is an awesome resource for information. we are all nice here too for the most part. so i hope you are not going to turn away because of a negative reaction. welcome to the forums. you'll like it here i promise.

I am a member of another forum (car related) that I have been on for years and have more posts there than I care to admit :D

But with that said, I continue to answer the same damn questions over and over month in and month out with the utmost patience. There is always some J@CKASS that posts exactly something like HARSH just did. The reason I don't jump on the newbs and continue to answer the same damn questions over and over is that guess what???????......I was a newb once on the forum and those very questions were asked by me and very graciously answered by the forum vets. I feel almost obligated (in a good way) to help out those newbs with patience the way I was helped. The last thing I want is for the forum to go straight into the crapper b/c nobody want to hang there anymore.


I'm with you there. I nearly got driven out of the Polk speaker forum when I dared express a contrary opinion, and asked what they thought was a dumb question. Seems internet forums in general bring out the worst in some people. FYI, If ya ever go to the Polk speaker forum, by the way, don't ever question the conventional wisdom of paying top dollar for fancy speaker wire. :lol:
I spend some time over on AVS as well (kind of a newb as well) and have seen this very DO A F'IN SEARCH type of comment but there are so many people there that the questions usually get answered very quickly. Still, it's just a buzz kill when somebody gets excited about their new "insert DBS, AVS, CAR, etc here" and join a forum only to be told by the old curmudgeons on the board to DO A F'IN SEARCH! Nice baptism by fire. Thank the Lord above that my skin is thick so I will tell others how I feel about their attitude and at the same time not get run off by it.

Thanks for the heads up on the Polk forum :goodjob:


The H20 HD receiver is about $300 or more to buy.
The HR20 HD DVR is about $800 to buy. You already know the typical lease fees. Plus if you lease, D* replaces them for at most S&H if they go belly up. You replace them i at your expense if they go belly up if you choose to buy. WIth very few exceptions, it makes no sense to buy these things today.

Wow! I remember that the "buy" prices were relatively what they are now with the "lease" prices as long as you "committed" to DTV for a period of time and that "buy" prices without a committment are the "buy" prices now.

So, essentially DTV said "we can charge the same amount and change from buy to lease"??? I could care less about keeping the receiver if I leave and can't imagine getting much on eBay for it years later but this whole "lease" terminology is confusing since you have to "buy" the box. Leasing would imply a monthly fee like the cable company does.

If you're in the DirecTV forums, feel free to ignore harsh's posts. He's a Dish Network subscriber, and only comes over here to troll.
I did and will do the same to others. Makes sense re: being a Dish subscriber. Does somebody maybe have DTV envy :hurah:

Seems that there are some FANTASTIC guys here on DBSTALK and I have been sitting on the sidelines for a few months to get a better understanding of where DTV is going and to make sure I make the right decision. All I know is that I can't stand my TW cable!

[DaveTheWave]

Dude, that was HARSH :lol:

[carl6]

So, essentially DTV said "we can charge the same amount and change from buy to lease"??? I could care less about keeping the receiver if I leave and can't imagine getting much on eBay for it years later but this whole "lease" terminology is confusing since you have to "buy" the box. Leasing would imply a monthly fee like the cable company does.

All I know is that I can't stand my TW cable!

The major difference as a customer now than in years past is that in the past you could pay $1000 up front for an HD DirecTivo DVR, and if you did not have the protection plan and it died six months later, you were out $1000. You owned it, you were responsible for it. Today, you pay $299 up front for the DirecTV Plus HD DVR and six months later it dies, you get it replaced for cost of shipping.

For the company, there are differences in accounting, depreciation, etc. I'm not sure what business arguements there are to support the lease versus buy approach, but obvioulsy DirecTV considered those aspects and decided it was worthwhile to move to the lease model.

Most of the folks on these forums believe the HR20 is a solid product that still needs some enhancements to make it even better, i.e., you would not be taking much risk to go to DirecTV HD. The R15 SD DVR is better than it was originally, but still needs some work (it is supposed to have more updates coming).

Welcome to the forums. If you do decide to move to DirecTV I think you will be satisfied. You are doing the right thing to research thoroughly first.

Carl

[996911]

The major difference as a customer now than in years past is that in the past you could pay $1000 up front for an HD DirecTivo DVR, and if you did not have the protection plan and it died six months later, you were out $1000. You owned it, you were responsible for it. Today, you pay $299 up front for the DirecTV Plus HD DVR and six months later it dies, you get it replaced for cost of shipping.

For the company, there are differences in accounting, depreciation, etc. I'm not sure what business arguements there are to support the lease versus buy approach, but obvioulsy DirecTV considered those aspects and decided it was worthwhile to move to the lease model.

Carl


That really helps as well. My biggest concern was really what they mean by "lease". It is good to hear that if the HR20 craps out they I just cover shipping and the replacement is rushed on over. That is comforting to know. I will have my setup with the new HD DVR in my main living room and my old SD Tivo that I own will be upstairs in the guest room and be used as a backup for recording should there be a 3 show recording night :)


Welcome to the forums. If you do decide to move to DirecTV I think you will be satisfied. You are doing the right thing to research thoroughly first.

Carl

Thanks for the warm welcome :goodjob:

I have made my mind up that I am 100% positive now that I will be moving to DTV. Just not sure when. It will be pretty soon though. I hate my TW Cable and the crap I have had to deal with. I was a DTV for 4 years before I cancelled about a year ago and I never in those 4 years had a problem and was totally satisfied with what I got for my $$$. I really need the NFL ticket as well since I am a displaced Cowboys fan and my wife a Bucs fan whose games are RARELY shown here in North Carolina. I think it would be best for me to wait until they run the NFL package special for signing up.

[wmschultz]

The major difference as a customer now than in years past is that in the past you could pay $1000 up front for an HD DirecTivo DVR, and if you did not have the protection plan and it died six months later, you were out $1000.

I have never had the protection plan and I did not buy the Best Buy warranty or anything. When ever I have
had a problem with my HR10-250's DirecTV sent me a replacement. So yes, I was out the initial cost of the $1000,
then $400, then $20, I have never had to pay for a replacement when they went bad.

And when my other owned receivers just died, I called they sent me replacements for $19.95.

So to me, I don't see any real difference in the lease or own. Of course I haven't had to pay any real costs for my new HR20s and H20.

As a matter of fact, the last receiver I actually "paid" for was my 2nd HR10-250 almost 3 years ago. I paid $400 and bought it from DirecTV.

Since then I have received:

2 R15's -- Free
2 HR20's -- 1 Free, 1 for 19.95
1 HR10-250 for 19.95
1 H20 -- Free

[hambonewd]

i dont even think its true that you can buy to receivers. people say that you can purchase them for like $800 or something like that. i doubt thats even a possibility.

[Jeremy W]

i dont even think its true that you can buy to receivers. people say that you can purchase them for like $800 or something like that. i doubt thats even a possibility.
Why would you doubt it? Just because practically nobody does it doesn't mean that it can't be done.

[hambonewd]

just wonder where and how it can be purchased.

[Big6Dad]

Ok 996911, that car forum wouldn't be Rennlist would it? Sorry for the short hijack....

[Jeremy W]

just wonder where and how it can be purchased.
Only by calling DirecTV and specfically asking to purchase it. If you buy it anywhere else, you're leasing it.

[hambonewd]

i see

[rwmair]

I have never had the protection plan and I did not buy the Best Buy warranty or anything. When ever I have had a problem with my HR10-250's DirecTV sent me a replacement. So yes, I was out the initial cost of the $1000, then $400, then $20, I have never had to pay for a replacement when they went bad.

And when my other owned receivers just died, I called they sent me replacements for $19.95.

So to me, I don't see any real difference in the lease or own. Of course I haven't had to pay any real costs for my new HR20s and H20.

As a matter of fact, the last receiver I actually "paid" for was my 2nd HR10-250 almost 3 years ago. I paid $400 and bought it from DirecTV.

Since then I have received:

2 R15's -- Free
2 HR20's -- 1 Free, 1 for 19.95
1 HR10-250 for 19.95
1 H20 -- Free


Maybe you guys will eventually win me over on this issue.

I've been wrestling with the pros and cons of leased vs owned. See my thread at:
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=83975

Ever since they changed to the lease model, I had assumed it was an insidious way for D* to eventually charge customers much more for the cost of a receiver than if they bought it outright.

Then, when I read how buggy the R15 and HR20 were when initially released, I thought maybe they were shamed into it by thousands of customers who paid big $$$ for expensive boxes that were going on the fritz.

I still expect that if I ever deactivate my original owned-outright HNS receiver, and work only with my "new" R10 that I also own outright, but got listed as leased when it was activated, that I'll still be charged $4.99 per month "lease fee" for an account with a single receiver.

But maybe I'll leave it that way and get on the free new-equipment bandwagon.

[hambonewd]

the 4.99 is paid regardless of whether its leased or owned-----its a programming fee

[DrEricCarlson]

Ever since they changed to the lease model, I had assumed it was an insidious way for D* to eventually charge customers much more for the cost of a receiver than if they bought it outright.

I still expect that if I ever deactivate my original owned-outright HNS receiver, and work only with my "new" R10 that I also own outright, but got listed as leased when it was activated, that I'll still be charged $4.99 per month "lease fee" for an account with a single receiver.
.

The lease fee is basically the mirror fee. You only pay the lease/mirror fee if you have more then one receiver.

The big reason DirecTV switched to leasing vs. purchasing was accounting on their part. With the purchase plan they were "selling" receivers that cost ~$800 for ~$300 and they had to show the loss on their books. With the lease plan they still own the receivers so there isn't a loss plus they get to depreciate the receivers which helps their books. If you look at their year end financial report they show big savings for DirecTV by switching to the lease plan. It really doesn't affect the consumer much other then having to return the receivers if they ever cancel their subscription. The plus for the consumer is that DirecTV owns the equipment so they will fix or replace the equipment for free.

-DrEric

[JohnF]

The lease fee is basically the mirror fee. You only pay the lease/mirror fee if you have more then one receiver.

The big reason DirecTV switched to leasing vs. purchasing was accounting on their part. With the purchase plan they were "selling" receivers that cost ~$800 for ~$300 and they had to show the loss on their books. With the lease plan they still own the receivers so there isn't a loss plus they get to depreciate the receivers which helps their books. If you look at their year end financial report they show big savings for DirecTV by switching to the lease plan. It really doesn't affect the consumer much other then having to return the receivers if they ever cancel their subscription. The plus for the consumer is that DirecTV owns the equipment so they will fix or replace the equipment for free.

-DrEric

Makes sense, but it still bothers me to spend half the purchase price to lease equipment. The cable companies and FIOS do not charge these up front fees. Maybe they use different accounting methods.

[rwmair]

The big reason DirecTV switched to leasing vs. purchasing was accounting on their part. With the purchase plan they were "selling" receivers that cost ~$800 for ~$300 and they had to show the loss on their books. With the lease plan they still own the receivers so there isn't a loss plus they get to depreciate the receivers which helps their books. If you look at their year end financial report they show big savings for DirecTV by switching to the lease plan. It really doesn't affect the consumer much other then having to return the receivers if they ever cancel their subscription. The plus for the consumer is that DirecTV owns the equipment so they will fix or replace the equipment for free.

Makes sense, but it still bothers me to spend half the purchase price to lease equipment. The cable companies and FIOS do not charge these up front fees. Maybe they use different accounting methods.

While Dr. Eric's comments make perfect sense, I have to agree with JohnF.

If you lease something, you lease it. You pay a monthly fee. You don't pay up front. I realize HR20's may actually cost $800, but if you're trying to convince a cable customer who has never had to buy expensive equipment, or dinosaurs like me who bought a $50 SD receiver 7 years ago to upgrade, $300 is still pretty steep. (Maybe not in comparison to a HD-TV, but I don't have one of those either. Once the drafty old windows have been replaced, etc etc...)

Maybe it doesn't help my peace of mind that these changes were bought in under the Murdoch regime - well known for creating massive revenue streams elsewhere where none previously existed. Not to mention that the change to the lease model also comes at a time when the cost of the base channel package has risen 60-70% in a couple of years (I realize, a totally unrelated event!), and now brings you less channels. To my mind, its hard to not get the impression that they're looking for yet another way to gouge the customer.

Even if they have to raise the monthly lease fees an extra $5 or so on HD DVR's, to me it would be more open and transparent than charging large upfront fees to give you the right to lease something. As you say, they are no longer selling $800 receivers for $300. They retain ownership of them, keep them on their books, and get to depreciate them over time. So why the need for any upfront fee?

Just my 2c.

[JLucPicard]

I Wish D* Hadn't Called This A Lease!

What everybody wants to call a lease fee (including D*) is nothing more than a mirroring fee. It is the exact same thing as the "Additional receiver fee" and the $5 a month does nothing more than pay for them to mirror the programming to your additional receivers. And if you only have one receiver or DVR on your account (and it happens to be leased), you pay no monthly "lease" fee!

The only real "lease fee" is the upfront cost that you pay. In the case of the HD DVR, it's $299 (or whatever deal D* makes).

The HR10-250, when that first came out, cost $1000. If there was more than one receiver on your account, you still paid $5 a month for each. So sell it to you for $800 or have you pay just $300 and give it back when you're done. And if it breaks, they'll fix/replace it for nothing more than shipping.

Yes, $300 is a chunk of change. And no, cable doesn't charge that on the boxes they lease/rent/whatever they want to call it. But I certainly don't mind paying less for the unit than it would cost to outright buy it, then give it back when I cancel service (at which point it wouldn't be any good to me anyway). I really do have a little trouble with people getting so out of joint over what they consider to be unfair practices.

Leased or owned, you pay some money up front to acquire a receiver. From that point forward, the costs of either are exactly the same.

I think "lease" was a pretty poor choice of words if you want people to understand things. I don't know right off hand what would be a better term, but I think people put way to much emphasis on the whole "lease" terminology. I think "mirroring fee" served its purpose just fine.

Just one man's opinion.

[veryoldschool]

Call the $300 [or whatever] a security deposit & return it when the unit is returned. simple.

[Jeremy W]

Call the $300 [or whatever] a security deposit & return it when the unit is returned. simple.
Yeah but then DirecTV doesn't make $300 off every receiver.

[rwmair]

Yeah but then DirecTV doesn't make $300 off every receiver.

If they 'own' the receiver into perpetuity, and slowly depreciate them off their books, why do they need to make $300 on each one... or $300 times however many people they send a receiver to over its lifetime (given returns when people cancel, or repair after replacement of faulty receiver)?

Avis or Hertz don't make you pay 1/3 the cost of the car each time you rent a car.....

The security-deposit idea is a great idea - and would make the concept transparent and less ambiguous.

[JLucPicard]

Avis or Hertz don't make you pay 1/3 the cost of the car each time you rent a car.....
No, they don't. And I'm not fully versed on car LEASES, but from commercials I've seen, etc. they do seem to want a bunch of money up front. And, they want you to make payments every month toward the value of the car.

Again, the only monthly payments ($4.99 a month) are for the programming and not the receiver itself. And you don't even pay that if it's your only receiver.

[veryoldschool]

What "I think" we're missing here is: the retail side, where "before" CC or BB or who ever would sell you D* equipment and make their commission. Fine this is a "standard" retail model. Now D* is leasing but still needs to keep the retail model for suppliers other than D* direct. So CC & BB need to "sell" something that they can make their commission from. Problem is "we" aren't buying anything, just leasing, so BB & CC need to sell a lease. D* needs to figure out a way to pay the retail store to lease D* equipment. $299 from D*, BB, CC, but $269 from Costco. This is the retail model for selling [with commissions] but what are we buying? D* service, not D* equipment as we used to do.
Well that's what "I see".
If it's a lease, then two things: 1) the only source is D* [like the cable companies] or 2) D* pays the retail stores their commission to distribute D* equipment [from the security deposit]. This maybe too simple but I sure don't understand the D* hybrid model & how it can be good for the consumer.

[996911]

Ok 996911, that car forum wouldn't be Rennlist would it? Sorry for the short hijack....

What would make you think that??? :D

[DrEricCarlson]

If you lease something, you lease it. You pay a monthly fee. You don't pay up front. I realize HR20's may actually cost $800, but if you're trying to convince a cable customer who has never had to buy expensive equipment, or dinosaurs like me who bought a $50 SD receiver 7 years ago to upgrade, $300 is still pretty steep.

Even if they have to raise the monthly lease fees an extra $5 or so on HD DVR's, to me it would be more open and transparent than charging large upfront fees to give you the right to lease something. As you say, they are no longer selling $800 receivers for $300. They retain ownership of them, keep them on their books, and get to depreciate them over time. So why the need for any upfront fee?


Think of the upfront cost as a down payment similar to what you put down when you lease a car. It's not uncommon to put money down when you lease an item. it's insurance for the company that you won't skip out with their equipment before you pay it off from your monthly lease fee.

However I don't know why DirecTV didn't go to the cable model where they just give you the equipment with no upfront cost and charge a higher lease fee per month. I guess it was just easier for them to rename the mirror fee to a lease fee and keep everything else the same. Another reason is maybe DirecTV doesn't want to lose the immediate revenue stream they were accustomed to with the upfront cost that helped to fund the purchase of new equipment.

[veryoldschool]

E* had the lease model & charges for their boxes, D* just followed.

[Jeremy W]

E* had the lease model & charges for their boxes, D* just followed.
DirecTV followed the wrong model. Cable's got the right model, Echostar's is wrong.

[CCarncross]

Who's to say whether its the right or wrong model? If it works for them and they still continue to grow, so be it. R U saying that because you want it free, or do you have some other information that makes it the wrong model?

[Jeremy W]

R U saying that because you want it free
Yes, that's part of it. Also because their biggest competition does it that way, and that's what most people switching to DirecTV will be used to. I'd much rather pay $10/month to lease a DVR with no upfront fee than $300 upfront and $5 month. It takes five years for me to break even with DirecTV vs. cable, and obviously DirecTV will come out with something better than the HR20 within five years, so I'd never actually break even. That's why I refused to pay the $300 for the HR20, and I will continue refusing in the future. When DirecTV doesn't offer me credits and makes me pay the fee, that's when I take my business elsewhere.

On the subject of car leases, they are a completely different animal and really have no business being brought into the discussion. Echostar and cable companies are the only ones you can compare this with, nothing else applies here.

[carl6]

DirecTV followed the wrong model. Cable's got the right model, Echostar's is wrong.

I don't agree. I have a much greater concern with the monthly recurring cost - that adds up over a longer period of time. One reason I am with DirecTV is because it will cost me more to have the same quantity and same type of equipment with cable (DVR's).

Carl

[Jeremy W]

One reason I am with DirecTV is because it will cost me more to have the same quantity and same type of equipment with cable (DVR's).
The pricing that I used in my post above is what Comcast charges in my area. It's $10/month to lease an HD DVR, with no upfront fee. That means it'll be five years before DirecTV's $300 upfront/$5 month option becomes cheaper, and I'll definitely be getting a new receiver (for another $300 or more) before that five years is up. So it's not cheaper in my case, except for the fact that DirecTV gives me credits to get rid of that $300 cost.

[carl6]

So it's not cheaper in my case, except for the fact that DirecTV gives me credits to get rid of that $300 cost.

A significant fact indeed.

I agree, it would sure be nice if the official price point was something below $299. But it seems that many have benefited from one promotion or another to effectively reduce or eliminate that formal price.

Further, strictly from a business standpoint, HR20's are flying off the shelves. From a business perspective, $299 is not high enough (but DirecTV isn't allowed to read this post).

Carl

[Jeremy W]

I agree, it would sure be nice if the official price point was something below $299. But it seems that many have benefited from one promotion or another to effectively reduce or eliminate that formal price.

Further, strictly from a business standpoint, HR20's are flying off the shelves. From a business perspective, $299 is not high enough (but DirecTV isn't allowed to read this post).
Absolutely. That's why I said that if the day ever comes where DirecTV refuses to give me credits, I'll be moving on to cable. I don't like DirecTV's leasing system at all, but as long as they keep shutting me up with my credits, I'll live with it.

[celticpride]

IF your hr20 is bad then replaced for free by D*, Do you have to commit for another 2 years on your contract?

[bonscott87]

Makes sense, but it still bothers me to spend half the purchase price to lease equipment. The cable companies and FIOS do not charge these up front fees. Maybe they use different accounting methods.

Yea they do.

It's called "$13 a month for an HD DVR fee PER DVR". Oh, you want a remote with that? $2 a month. Etc., Etc.

Cable gets you with monthly fees far higher then DirecTV. With DirecTV it's more up front but a lot less per month.

Pick your poison, you're paying it one way or another. At least with DirecTV you'll come out ahead over the cable higher monthly fee in a couple years or less.

[Jeremy W]

IF your hr20 is bad then replaced for free by D*, Do you have to commit for another 2 years on your contract?
No.

[JLucPicard]

On the subject of car leases, they are a completely different animal and really have no business being brought into the discussion. Echostar and cable companies are the only ones you can compare this with, nothing else applies here.
If that's the case, then I think you need to eliminate the $5 per month aspect from the discussion as well.

If you lease or own just one receiver, you do not pay that $5 per month additional fee.

Now, if you own multiple receivers, you are going to pay $5 per month for each one after the first one. Period. That's strictly a fee they charge to put the programming on the additional boxes to match your package.

If you have multiple receivers and any of them are leased, you pay the same $5 per month for them to mirror the programming to your additional boxes.

The $5 per month that D* unfortunately chooses to call a "lease fee" has nothing to do at all with making payments on the equipment on a monthly basis. The only actual equipment charge is whatever you paid (or didn't pay with discounts/credits) up front. Everything beyond that you would be paying whether you lease or own the receiver anyway.

As someone who has mucho multiple receivers on their account and paid anywhere from $1000 for my first HR10-250 to nothing at all for some of my others, I much prefer for the cost of those receivers to be a one-time, up-front thing.

And to the best of my knowledge, except for some people who had gotten their receiver and were able to pay in three monthly installments (I got my first HR20 that way) or some such thing, nobody has paid equipment charges on a month-to-month, $5-a-month basis - those are all programming charges, not equipment charges.

[Jeremy W]

If that's the case, then I think you need to eliminate the $5 per month aspect from the discussion as well.
No, because the first box is free with cable too. Unless it's a DVR, but DirecTV charges a $6 DVR fee so it really balances out in the end. It's perfectly fair to keep it in the argument.
The $5 per month that D* unfortunately chooses to call a "lease fee" has nothing to do at all with making payments on the equipment on a monthly basis.
That's what you say, but DirecTV disagrees with you. It's called a lease fee, so the accounting in DirecTV's books is exactly the same as the lease fee for cable. Why you keep saying it's "unfortunate" is unclear to me. Just because the old mirroring fee was the same price doesn't mean that there is no difference.

[bonscott87]

LOL.

There is no difference because no matter owned or leased, I still pay $5 a month. ;)

[Jeremy W]

There is no difference because no matter owned or leased, I still pay $5 a month. ;)
Like I said, the difference is in DirecTV's accounting. And if it's leased, many states (including ours) charge a tax on the lease fee. The mirroring fee never had such a tax. That right there should be enough to show that it's a different fee, even though it's the same price.

[JohnF]

Yea they do.

It's called "$13 a month for an HD DVR fee PER DVR". Oh, you want a remote with that? $2 a month. Etc., Etc.

Cable gets you with monthly fees far higher then DirecTV. With DirecTV it's more up front but a lot less per month.

Pick your poison, you're paying it one way or another. At least with DirecTV you'll come out ahead over the cable higher monthly fee in a couple years or less.

With FIOS, the HD DVR is provided with no up front costs, and for me with HD channels the monthly cost is less. I'm not making a move at this point because I have 2 HR10-250s and I do not want to discard them yet. Also, I am waiting to see upcoming HD line up which could cause me to remain with D*.

Regarding calling the up front money a security deposit, I think that's a great idea. Security deposits are generally REFUNDED at the conclusion of service, or the end of a lease.

[ldmth44]

I Wish D* Hadn't Called This A Lease!

What everybody wants to call a lease fee (including D*) is nothing more than a mirroring fee. It is the exact same thing as the "Additional receiver fee" and the $5 a month does nothing more than pay for them to mirror the programming to your additional receivers. And if you only have one receiver or DVR on your account (and it happens to be leased), you pay no monthly "lease" fee!

The only real "lease fee" is the upfront cost that you pay. In the case of the HD DVR, it's $299 (or whatever deal D* makes).

The HR10-250, when that first came out, cost $1000. If there was more than one receiver on your account, you still paid $5 a month for each. So sell it to you for $800 or have you pay just $300 and give it back when you're done. And if it breaks, they'll fix/replace it for nothing more than shipping.

Yes, $300 is a chunk of change. And no, cable doesn't charge that on the boxes they lease/rent/whatever they want to call it. But I certainly don't mind paying less for the unit than it would cost to outright buy it, then give it back when I cancel service (at which point it wouldn't be any good to me anyway). I really do have a little trouble with people getting so out of joint over what they consider to be unfair practices.

Leased or owned, you pay some money up front to acquire a receiver. From that point forward, the costs of either are exactly the same.

I think "lease" was a pretty poor choice of words if you want people to understand things. I don't know right off hand what would be a better term, but I think people put way to much emphasis on the whole "lease" terminology. I think "mirroring fee" served its purpose just fine.

Just one man's opinion.

Wouldn't the upfront fee be comparable to what a cable company charges per month for HD service inasmuch that this fee is upfront on a two year lease
($300 over a 24 month period = $12.50 a month)?

[veryoldschool]

Wouldn't the upfront fee be comparable to what a cable company charges per month for HD service inasmuch that this fee is upfront on a two year lease
($300 over a 24 month period = $12.50 a month)?
Then add the D* HD monthly service charge to that?

[ldmth44]

Then add the D* HD monthly service charge to that?

Everyone has some sort of fees. It just depends whether you want this provider or the other. We all have preferences.

[veryoldschool]

Everyone has some sort of fees. It just depends whether you want this provider or the other. We all have preferences.
I just didn't see your logic of comparing the D* $300/24 months to a cable HD fee, since D* still charges a monthly fee for HD so the monthly fee = $22.50 over the 24 months. My cable fees for HD + equipment were not this high. Which was my point is all.
:)

[bonscott87]

I just didn't see your logic of comparing the D* $300/24 months to a cable HD fee, since D* still charges a monthly fee for HD so the monthly fee = $22.50 over the 24 months. My cable fees for HD + equipment were not this high. Which was my point is all.
:)

Which points out that every cable company is different.

My cable:
No upfront fee, $11 per month for the HD DVR, for each one you want, including your first.
Programming fees on top of that of course. "Expanded Digital" lowest required base package, about $65 a month, then HD programming fees on top of that. Less HD channels then even DirecTV has.

DirecTV:
$300 (down to free) upfront fee, no monthly fee if it's your only receiver, $5 a month beyond the first which you pay anyway for an extra receiver.
$10 a month HD programming fee, cheaper Choice package available.

DirecTV by far is cheaper then cable. By far.
You have excellent (and very rare) cable company that doesn't soak you on HD.

[Jeremy W]

You have excellent (and very rare) cable company that doesn't soak you on HD.
Comcast in my area doesn't charge anything for HD. You have an HD box, you get the HD channels.

[veryoldschool]

You have excellent (and very rare) cable company that doesn't soak you on HD.
If you saw [as I did] what their hardware & PQ was, I don't think "excellent" would be used [and why I'm still here with D*]. :D

As with many, I just have a hard time with $300 for something I don't own. I may throw money away in monthly programing, but hardware is tangible. A security deposit I understand, paying for the privilege to lease, I don't. Just mine opinion.
I have 2 H-20s & 2 HR-20s, so D* was good to me. :)

[Bobweiser]

I just came from Best Buy. They are selling the few HD units they have left for $99 and said all future ones would be leased. Cost of leasing: $4.99/month plus $5.99 for HD.

If you bought the units you would have your cost back in about 18 months of leasing.

[Jeremy W]

I just came from Best Buy. They are selling the few HD units they have left for $99 and said all future ones would be leased. Cost of leasing: $4.99/month plus $5.99 for HD.
What are you talking about?

[veryoldschool]

What are you talking about?
H20 not HR20

[bobnielsen]

H20 not HR20

Still leased at that price.

[veryoldschool]

Still leased at that price.
Yep, and let's remember the source was "Best buy", who we all know as being absolutely "in the know". :lol:

[bobnielsen]

Yep, and let's remember the source was "Best buy", who we all know as being absolutely "in the know". :lol:

Yup. I picked up a H20 there last summer. There was no mention of it, but I already knew that it would be a lease. When I bought a HDVR2 there several years ago there was all sorts of paperwork to sign, but nothing for the H20. If I hadn't activated it, Directv would have no knowledge of my having it (but it wouldn't have done me much good in that case).

[Jeremy W]

H20 not HR20
But the $5.99 fee would be the DVR fee, not HD Access.

[veryoldschool]

But the $5.99 fee would be the DVR fee, not HD Access.
Or a miss quoted receiver lease [mirroring] fee.

[lug1]

In the past many people would rent as much movies or porn as they could without the phone line plugged in. Now if some one was to do this they have to send the receiver back to Dtv and they will charge them for all those rents.

[veryoldschool]

In the past many people would rent as much movies or porn as they could without the phone line plugged in......
The access card stores this info up to $20-30 and then..you need to call it in, to get anymore......