1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

DBSTalk Exclusive First Look: HR34-700 Home Media Center HD DVR

Discussion in 'DIRECTV HD DVR/Receiver Discussion' started by Stuart Sweet, Oct 6, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. markrogo

    markrogo Godfather

    300
    1
    Sep 18, 2007
    If Stuart is correct and it's $6 per TV, that alters the way I think about deploying the HR34 and I suspect it might do the same for anyone that was running more than one DVR in their family room/living room for the purpose of having access to more tuners.

    Original plan
    Current: 3 DVRs in family room, 1 upstairs at remote TV
    Post HR34: 1 HR34 + 1 HR24 in family room, 1 client box upstairs

    New plan
    Post HR34: 1 H34 in family room, 1 HR24 upstairs...

    If we ever put a TV in the 2nd bedroom, it will get a client box. In the meantime, I'm going from 4 DVRs to 1 HR34 + 1 regular DVR. Unless they find some new fee, I'm going to save $12 per month (so I presume they'll find some new fee; does anyone know yet?!). We'll have 7 tuners instead of 8, but really we only make use of 6 now.

    The $399 still feels ridiculous, but we'll see what they'll do for "premier" customers when the time is right. Question: When they don't ask for your gear back, can you sell it to someone obsessed with "owning" receivers?
     
  2. Sgt. Slaughter

    Sgt. Slaughter Hall Of Fame

    2,981
    34
    Feb 20, 2009
    Then they came out with NOMAD and that service was.......free except for the one time equipment cost. So it will be interesting to see how they end up doing this.
    I think its fairly easy to think of solutions on how they will possibly charge for it in a home that ONLY has 1 HR34. Like the other poster mentioned about cable companies not able to charge for boxes they didn't have at homes they might charge per client, and if you have one built in then you not pay, or they might charge for flat rate all 3 together like others said since it can only stream to 3 at once and that would be the "max."

    Now where it gets confusing is when you toss in the HR34 into the mix of WHDVR and other HR's. All depends on how they decide to charge for the "clients/RVU," as if its a large client/rvu fee(like ppl have suggested in this thread) does that "fee" include any box in the home or will they make it just "clients" so you'd have to pay for your mirroring fee also on other stb's in home as well. If thats the case then it makes it where the HR34 might not be suitable cost wise for everybody unless you replace multiple boxes with it and clients. Another thought is if they do the "lump charge" for it like some suggested in here, could they offer it and allow you to disable the RVU function on it and allow you to avoid the "lump charge/client/rvu fee" and only use it with WHDVR??

    all in all it gets real interesting when you think about all the possibilities here and no one knows till the thing gets put mainstream for everyone to get...
     
  3. cypherx

    cypherx Hall Of Fame

    3,472
    68
    Aug 27, 2010
    PA - Berks...
    If you buy an RVU compatible TV, didn't you already pay for the RVU in the TV? So why would you have to pay $6 a month or so? Is this just to appease the content owners (NBC Universal, Viacom, CBS, Fox, etc...) ?
     
  4. sd72667

    sd72667 AllStar

    72
    1
    Aug 25, 2008
    Why does DirecTV charge anything for a LEASED receiver? We still pay a lease fee every month. I believe Cable companies give you the receiver for free but charges a monthly lease fee. I'm already paying nearly $300 a month. With that said, I still want a HR34 under my Xmas tree in 2 months.
     
  5. Drew2k

    Drew2k New Member

    14,514
    228
    Aug 16, 2006
    The "lease" fee replaces a "mirroring" fee on leased equipment. Either way, it's their way of authorizing service on each receiver beyond the first, without charging the full programming package fee for each additional receiver. (In brief, they switched to a "lease" approach for accounting purposes, to lower their overhead on cost of receivers and amortize the cost over the projected life span of receivers.)
     
  6. Steve

    Steve Well-Known Member

    23,060
    154
    Aug 22, 2006
    Lower...
    What Drew said. ^

    Another way to look at it is "pay me now" or "pay me later". FiOS gives you a DVR for free, e.g., but charges you $15.99/month for service, $10 more than DirecTV's $6 lease fee. So at the end of 2 years, you paid an extra $240 for the Verizon DVR, vs. whatever you paid "up front" for the leased DirecTV DVR.
     
  7. matt

    matt New Member

    4,858
    1
    Jan 11, 2010
    Get used to it. If you don't like it buy an antenna and a DTV converter.
     
  8. RunnerFL

    RunnerFL Well-Known Member

    17,054
    312
    Jan 4, 2006
    You paid for the client, yes.

    Content. That is why we all pay $6 a month for each receiver past #1 now, content.
     
  9. cypherx

    cypherx Hall Of Fame

    3,472
    68
    Aug 27, 2010
    PA - Berks...
    I bet it's mandated by the outrageous fees the content owners pass to DirecTV.

    The taxman cometh, the taxman taketh away!
     
  10. RunnerFL

    RunnerFL Well-Known Member

    17,054
    312
    Jan 4, 2006
    Yeah, but they get $6 now to "mirror" your account to each of your receivers, why wouldn't they for an RVU client?
     
  11. Alan Gordon

    Alan Gordon Chancellor

    9,094
    100
    Jun 7, 2004
    Dawson, Georgia
    I think this (^) would be a mistake.

    I'm aware that the use of the HR34 and RVU clients are intended to save DirecTV money (and not necessarily that of the subscriber), and...

    ...Granted, I have multiple DVRs and only intend ("intend" being the operative word) on getting one HR34 to use as a SUPER DVR... :D

    ... but, if I was a new subscriber and DirecTV offered an HR34/C30 setup in which I could place a C30 at every TV (including ones I rarely use) for a cheaper monthly price, I would consider them to be hard to beat compared to other providers. I would also be more open to subscribing to higher priced programming packages.

    Not to mention that I would be more likely to convince others I know to switch to DirecTV for those very reasons. I know several people who still subscribe to cable because they don't have to pay "mirroring/leasing" fees for each individual TV, and would jump at the chance to get something like the HR34/C30 setup.


    Not really surprised... just disappointed. :(

    ~Alan
     
  12. Alan Gordon

    Alan Gordon Chancellor

    9,094
    100
    Jun 7, 2004
    Dawson, Georgia
    I think in some markets where Comcast has gone all digital, they lease out small basic boxes for either free or $1.50 a month.

    ~Alan
     
  13. Steve

    Steve Well-Known Member

    23,060
    154
    Aug 22, 2006
    Lower...
    Alan, I could be wrong, but an example of a minimum monthly charge for an HR34 might be a "minimum of 3 clients", at $6 each, or $18. Since you can only use 3 clients simultaneously, I think this model would allow you to have an RVU client at every location, but only use 3 at a time.

    So I could see an HR34 and 3 physical RVU clients having an "up front" charge of $399, e.g., and an $18 monthly charge (minimum 3 x $6).

    And maybe an HR34 and no physical clients (because you have RVU TV's, or you plan to use it as an MRV server) is only $299 up front, but you still pay a minimum of $18 no matter how many RVU TV's you have, or a minimum of $18 for three H25's (that cost you $100 each up front). Just my .02.
     
  14. Alan Gordon

    Alan Gordon Chancellor

    9,094
    100
    Jun 7, 2004
    Dawson, Georgia
    Again... wouldn't surprise me, but still disappointed if true. :(

    Again... wouldn't surprise me, but still disappointed if true. :(

    ~Alan
     
  15. P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    22,488
    229
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    The 'mirror' fee was brought as a fee "because we want" from beginning.
    Pretty sure the 'bright' idea was 'borrowed' from cable co who charged per TV not that long time ago. What I thingk originally been invented as silly attempt to make it even with cinema theaters.
    Yeah, each content provider would die to implement same model now: one person+one time view REQUIRED to pay [ticket] ! But that train is went out - Internet is biting their as.. umm, greed.
     
  16. wco81

    wco81 Legend

    209
    0
    Feb 23, 2008
    Yeah I wouldn't be surprised if most of that mirroring fee is pure profit.

    Do content providers get paid per subscriber or per client machine?
     
  17. Steve

    Steve Well-Known Member

    23,060
    154
    Aug 22, 2006
    Lower...
    So you are saying you want to be able to use an HR34 with less than 3 RVU (or MRV) clients in the home?
     
  18. deardeva

    deardeva Mentor

    32
    0
    Sep 16, 2011
    :lol: next year, next year, like the sound of that, :D since we cant get it this year, I will quite happily wait for the HR34. :sure: I dont have to be first on the list, just will be glad if I can get one of these in the future! ;) Looking up for Directv and me! :grin:
     
  19. matt

    matt New Member

    4,858
    1
    Jan 11, 2010
    I'm sure those of us with more than one receiver cost D* no more administrative/technical/content costs than those with just one lone receiver. :sure:
     
  20. cypherx

    cypherx Hall Of Fame

    3,472
    68
    Aug 27, 2010
    PA - Berks...
    I can understand if you lease a c30 or whatever external RVU box from DirecTV, because it's DirecTV's... but say you buy a Samsung HDTV with built in RVU... you OWN that RVU client. It's yours to do whatever you want with.

    If the HR34 is built and designed to serve up to 3 RVU clients at a time, one has to wonder will it do so appropriately?

    Currently I have an HR24 and it can serve DVR programs to other receivers in the house or my PC via DirecTV2PC.

    Now an RVU TV doesn't have an access card slot. It's all being decrypted and decoded once, over in the HR34. So the license fee to NDS for access decryption technology isn't the issue here. My only guess is that content providers are pressuring DirecTV for this fee. "So and so can watch our stuff in different rooms at once? Blasphemy! More eyes = more money!!!!" (especially FOX).

    I can see it going both ways. I see two sides to the argument here. While I would prefer your OWN RVU TV not susceptible to a mirror fee, because it is not a tuner (it's just Remote desktop-ed or whatever you want to call it) to the main box (1 access card, 1 physical machine). However like many have said, I'm sure if there's a way to charge money, they will.

    Comcast gives 2 free DTA's and it's $1.99 for any beyond that. That only gives you about 100 channels though. If you want on demand, the full guide and everything else, including premiums, that'll cost you (sometimes as much as $9.80 in certain markets!!!)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page