# Official Word From Replay



## jleavens

The ReplayTV website should be updated sometime today with this information, but I've been allowed to share the following information with the forum:


(Please note that since this is not an official statement from Replay, I may have some details wrong, but I believe them to be correct. Please do not threaten to sue me if I make a mistake)


The new prices on the ReplayTVs are official as of today. The pricing on the units (as many know already) does *not* include any service plans:


5504 - 40 Hours - $149.99

5508 - 80 Hours - $299.99

5516 - 160 Hours - $449.99

5532 - 320 Hours - $799.99


Service activation can be had for $12.99/month or $300 for lifetime service (lifetime meaning the lifetime of the unit). Each box needs its own activation, and as always, the units will not function without activation.


Now, here's the part that many have speculated on:

Replay has been working with the retailers in order to collect information on the units sold in the past week, when the retailers jumped the gun and lowered prices prematurely without altering their stock to reflect the new unbundled service. This includes collecting the serial numbers, purchase date, and purchase price of the units sold. *Replay will be using the purchase price as the sole criteria to determine whether or not the unit included service activation or not*: if it was sold at the old pricing, it will include activation, if it was sold at the new pricing (as above), it will not. In case of a dispute, customers will be asked to provide a copy of the sales invoice.


Customers who are not interested in keeping the boxes under these circumstances are welcome to return them to the retailers under their normal money-back policies (both Circuit City and Radio Shack have 30 day MBG, so this shouldn't be a problem).


My understanding from different sources is that the units in question will most likely be de-activated and require re-activation within 10 days. I have not gotten this officially, but we've heard enough circumstantial evidence around here to believe this to be true.


The good news is: For those people who have purchased 5500 units or 5040 units from Radio Shack that included 3 years of service, you will now have your service activations converted to "lifetime"! No more of that 99 cents/month add-on to worry about.


I have also been told that the Customer Service centers will be fully staffed over the holiday season in order to handle any problems or questions with this issue.


Ok, bring it on....


----------



## sixt7gt350

They've left themselves wide open to the "gift" lie.


Magically, America's Jewish population surged overnight when it was discovered that receiving a ReplayTV as a Hanukkah gift was the ticket to free service.


----------



## dewolfxy

they're not leaving themselves open to the gift lie, they're requesting proof of payment price. if this is the case, the people who are really in trouble are those who got it as a gift, the purchser paid $500, but they can't provide proof of purchase price. Probably few and far between, but it would really stink to be one of those people.


----------



## QuadGuy

My reading is that they will be deactivating ALL the 5504s that have been activated since 12/17 and you'll have 10 days to prove you paid $500, not $150...


How do you read it?


----------



## avhokie

I think it's going to be a headache for everyone involved, especially since Circuit City sold tons of 5504s at $149.99 that said service was included on the website, on the box, and inside the box.


"Sorry sir, but there's no warranty on your car since you paid less than $xxx" wouldn't fly.


----------



## sixt7gt350

P.S. The pricing table did not mention 5XXX units.

Where does that leave them?


----------



## NearlyGod

As a follower of this situation (My local CC was out of units when I checked on Friday), I am very disappointed in this response. My friends think that I am evil because I have a marketing degree. They think that companies are trying to take advantage of them and marketing is the means with with they accomplish this. Situations like this only serve to reinforce this perception. A company (either CC or RTV, take your pick) offered activated units for a low price and now they are retracting that offer after the transaction has been completed. All of us evil marketing professionals know that when you screw up, you take it on the chin and you do what is best for the customer. This issue is compounded by the fact that many were purchased as gifts and now the giver looks like an ass for buying 1/3 of a gift and it is worthless with the receiver paying for the other 2/3 of the gift. I have have my 5040 for about 6 months and I love it, but this situation has effectively ended my relationship with RTV. If this is how they run there business, I will choose not to support them with my disposable income. I may not have been affected by this situation as directly as others, but I still support you. When my 5040 dies, I will move on to Tivo or whatever other options arise before then and I won't be adding any more units to my current setup even though the thought has crossed my mind. This is not how a corporation does business, and I hope that consumers have not been brainwashed into thinking that this treatment is acceptable but unfortunately, I'm not too sure if that is the case.


----------



## Runny

After 2 calls to the activation line to plead my case (the honest one), I figure I will return all of the RTV's I purchased on the 17th to Radio Shack and be done with the whole matter.

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*My understanding from different sources is that the units in question will most likely be de-activated and require re-activation within 10 days. I have not gotten this officially, but we've heard enough circumstantial evidence around here to believe this to be true.*
Granted, the information is not official, but do you suppose "units in question" includes EVERYBODY who purchased from 12/17 onward, including those who lied their way to free activation before they required proof?


- Runny


----------



## grimas

From FW:


PRESS RELEASE:::



The Industry's Premium Quality DVRs, and Best Overall Value...

REPLAYTV ANNOUNCES NEW FLEXIBLE PRICING MODEL FOR ITS AWARD-WINNING 5500 SERIES DIGITAL VIDEO RECORDERS

-- Purchasers Now Have Choice of Buying the ReplayTV Service Monthly or for a Single Onetime Fee --


SANTA CLARA, California, December 22, 2003 â€“ ReplayTVÂ®, the inventor and creator of personal television, today announced a new flexible pricing model for its acclaimed 5500 Series Digital Video Recorders (DVR). *Beginning immediately*, consumers will be able to purchase ReplayTV 5500 Series DVRs at the following prices: $149.99 for the 40-hour Model RTV5504; $299.99 for the 80-hour RTV5508; $449.99 for the 160-hour RTV5516; and $799.99 for the new 320-hour RTV5532. With each model, consumers will have the choice of either purchasing the ReplayTV Service for a $12.95 monthly fee, or choosing lifetime service bundled with the product for a single, onetime payment of $299. ReplayTV 5500 Series customers who have already purchased 3-year subscriptions to the ReplayTV Service under the previous pricing model will have their services automatically extended for the lifetime of the product at no additional charge.


ReplayTV President Bernie Sepaniak commented on the companyâ€™s pricing move, noting: â€œReplayTV has always been committed to providing our customers with superior quality premium DVRs, offering the most powerful feature sets, highest recording capacity, as well as the industryâ€™s best overall value. With our new pricing model, weâ€™re making a ReplayTV DVR purchase even more attractive for consumers, providing unprecedented value, while allowing them to choose between either purchasing the lifetime service upfront or on a monthly subscription basis.â€


ReplayTV 5500 Series: The Premium DVR Choice

The ReplayTV 5500 Series is the industryâ€™s broadest range of premium full-featured DVRs, offering a host of unique image-enhancing features including progressive scan and digital audio outputs, as well as superior recording features like One-Touch Record; First Run, the ability to only record first-run programs and skip repeats; and theme-based recording. Additionally, ReplayTV 5500 Series DVRs provide built-in networking capability, which allows for instantaneous connectivity to other units in the home network â€“ with no additional fees or adapters. And because itâ€™s broadband-ready, users can choose either to connect to the ReplayTV Service through their high-speed broadband Internet connection or simply plug in their regular phone line and connect using ReplayTV's built-in V.90 analog modem.


ReplayTVâ€™s Industry-Leading JumpItâ„¢ Feature Set with Show|Navâ„¢

ReplayTV 5500 Series DVRs offer industry-leading features that put unprecedented control options in the hands of TV viewers and deliver a new level of intelligent control. These features include the advanced JumpItâ„¢ set of viewer control functions, including Show|Navâ„¢, QuickSkipÂ®, Instant Replay, and Jump Anywhereâ„¢. Major benefits of each feature are as follows:


* Show|Nav lets ReplayTV DVR users navigate programs by segment, making it more intuitive and easier than ever before to quickly find and view precisely the scenes they want to enjoy. Users can jump to any segment of a recorded program quickly, instead of hunting for it using fast-forward as with other DVR brands;

* QuickSkip lets viewers instantly advance 30 seconds ahead while watching any recorded program;

* Instant Replay lets viewers jump back to review the last seven seconds (great for catching that missed snippet of dialogue);

* Jump Anywhere lets viewers jump forward or back by any number of minutes in a recorded program. Users can just enter the number of minutes they want to jump, press QuickSkip or Instant Replay â€“ and theyâ€™ll be precisely where they want to be.


JumpIt, Jump Anywhere and the ReplayTV logo are trademarks of D&M Holdings Inc.

Show|Nav is licensed by and a trademark of Televentions, LLC.


About ReplayTV

ReplayTVÂ® is the inventor and creator of personal television and offers the most powerful DVRs on the planet. ReplayTV has earned over 20 prestigious awards including CNETâ€™s Editors Choice Award and is the winner of an Emmy for technological achievement. The company leads the DVR industry in groundbreaking innovations aimed at providing consumers with unmatched power and control in maximizing their TV viewing experience with the best performance and best value. Founded in 1997, ReplayTV is headquartered in Santa Clara, California. The ReplayTVÂ® brand is owned by D&M Holdings U.S., Inc., through its wholly owned subsidiary Digital Networks North America, Inc.


About D&M Holdings Inc.

D&M Holdings Inc. is based in Tokyo and is the parent company of wholly owned subsidiaries Denon Ltd., Marantz Japan, Inc. and McIntosh Laboratory, Inc.- global industry leaders in the specialist home theater, audio/video consumer electronics and professional audio markets. In addition, through its U.S. based owned subsidiary, D&M Holdings also owns the ReplayTVÂ®, RioÂ® and EscientÂ® brands - each representing award-winning technologies in digital home entertainment. Additional information is available at www.dm-holdings.com. 


DISCLAIMER

Statements in this news release that are not statements of historical fact may include forward looking statements regarding future events or the future financial performance of the company. We wish to caution you that such statements are just predictions and that actual events or results may differ materially. Forward looking statements involve a number of risks and uncertainties surrounding competitive and industry conditions, market acceptance for the company's products, risks of litigation, technological changes, developing industry standards and other factors related to the company's businesses.


A home network is required for streaming shows to another compatible ReplayTV inside your home. A PC connected to a home network is required to store and view digital photos with ReplayTV. 320- hour recording capability is only available in the ReplayTV 5532 model. All specifications may be changed without notice.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:


Media Contacts:

DBA Public Relations

Sara Trujillo

+1-212-388-1400
[email protected] 


John Muscari

+1-212-388-1400
[email protected]


----------



## WannabeSQ

What's to stop someone who paid the full $499 price, getting it activated with the reciept, and then getting the 110% price protection guarantee? I didn't see that mentioned anywhere, but im sure there are very few people (in comparison) that bought the full price units in the first place.


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by WannabeSQ_
*What's to stop someone who paid the full $499 price, getting it activated with the reciept, and then getting the 110% price protection guarantee? I didn't see that mentioned anywhere, but im sure there are very few people (in comparison) that bought the full price units in the first place.*
The retailer would stop you. If they don't, they just simply eat the cost. There are always going to be people who manage to find an ignorant employee or store manager who will make the price adjustment. Not really relevent to the discussion at hand.


----------



## Runny

FYI - activation web page now shows the $12.95/$299 price, whereas about 30 minutes ago it showed the lower prices...


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by sixt7gt350_
*P.S. The pricing table did not mention 5XXX units.

Where does that leave them?*
My belief is that the will follow the 55XX pricing, as they had done before. No units will be sold with activation bundled at all.


----------



## grimas

Note the "Beginning immediately" in the press release dated today, 12/22. What about the pricing prior to today?


----------



## vivarey

It will be near-impossible to track serial numbers from CC, because they aren't recorded at the point of sale. IMO, this is all speculation at this point, but if it's true: DNNA may be resorting to unethical (or even illegal) tactics to recoup some of their loss. I'm sure no one gave CC permission to give/sell their information (or about their unit) to anyone, let alone DNNA.


Those people bought RTVs with a very clear indication that they were also getting 3 free years of service - regardless of the purchase price. Since when is the consumer responsible for corporate screw-ups? *Bottom line- these units should have been PULLED from stores BEFORE the price change.* But they weren't, so those who bought one are entitled to the benefits that come with the unit. In this case, this means they should get their 3 free years of service (see RTV website for verification on this).


And it's not like they were giving these units away, either! Believe it or not, a lot of folks think $150 is a LOT of money! It's not like they walked away with a free RTV. Why shouldn't they assume it includes the free service? I just don't see the argument...


Regardless, I can see now that this is going to end up messy, and a lot of people will be very upset.


Thanks for the update jleavens, and is it possible for you to share your source?


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by dewolfxy_
*they're not leaving themselves open to the gift lie, they're requesting proof of payment price. if this is the case, the people who are really in trouble are those who got it as a gift, the purchser paid $500, but they can't provide proof of purchase price. Probably few and far between, but it would really stink to be one of those people.*
Unless you got it anonymously, it's not like you couldn't ask the giver to fax the information to Replay for you... They don't even have to send the price info to the gift recipient.


Where it *will* suck will be for the people who paid more than $150 for a Replay on eBay with the claim that it was activated.


----------



## lizard_boy

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*It will be near-impossible to track serial numbers from CC, because they aren't recorded at the point of sale.*
Wrong, CC has recorded serial numbers for several years.


----------



## lizard_boy

I may have missed this elsewhere, but are the prices going up for people with 5000-series units that were activated at $9.95/month long before this snafu? I have a few friends who purchased 5040's when buy.com had them for ~$125 and chose $10/month instead of lifetime activation.


----------



## rayw69

I don't understand this obsession with serial numbers. DNNA doesn't need to link serial numbers to purchase price. They can simply deactivate all units activated 12/17 or later, and have people pay for activation, barring proof that the higher price was paid for the unit.


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by lizard_boy_
*Wrong, CC has recorded serial numbers for several years.*
Perhaps, but they don't track them at the point of sale (i.e. attaching a serial number to a specific purchaser). This information is coming from a CC employee (not me) - and it may differ from store to store.


----------



## NearlyGod

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Unless you got it anonymously, it's not like you couldn't ask the giver to fax the information to Replay for you... They don't even have to send the price info to the gift recipient.*
I bet people will love to do this. It will in no way reflect poorly on the company? Where did the people at DNNA get there business degrees anyway? The fact that people would find this solution reasonable is an insult. People are not merely consumers to milk money from. What has happened to our society that now makes it OK for someone to buy something and then to either accept much less than they purchased. I don't care if I paid 150 or 1500 for the product, I still expect it to include what it says it will on the packaging, product literature, etc.


I have seen people posting that they don't want to hurt RTV. Well if this is how they run their business, maybe they deserve to take a hit. Capitalism is the survival of the fittest (unless you are a govt supported entity of course) and if this is how DNNA runs their business, maybe they should not be in business.


----------



## jay_k

Quote:

_Originally posted by NearlyGod_
*I bet people will love to do this. It will in no way reflect poorly on the company? Where did the people at DNNA get there business degrees anyway? The fact that people would find this solution reasonable is an insult. People are not merely consumers to milk money from. What has happened to our society that now makes it OK for someone to buy something and then to either accept much less than they purchased. I don't care if I paid 150 or 1500 for the product, I still expect it to include what it says it will on the packaging, product literature, etc.


I have seen people posting that they don't want to hurt RTV. Well if this is how they run their business, maybe they deserve to take a hit. Capitalism is the survival of the fittest (unless you are a govt supported entity of course) and if this is how DNNA runs their business, maybe they should not be in business.*
I agree...any cost savings they realize by denying people activations would pale in comparison to the number of returns they'll get, and the badwill they've generated. Especially with so many people giving these as holiday gifts...the recipient's first (and probably only) experience with Replay will be that they lied on their packaging.


----------



## jleavens

Yeah, it's crazy to ask people to pay the actual price of the product instead of giving it away at a loss. Nuts.


Guys, the retailers dropped the ball here too. Try taking it up with them...


----------



## NearlyGod

Everyone paid the price that was asked. The units where marked and sold at $150 w/ 3 years service. I'm missing your arguement.


----------



## Zwingle

Look....this is clearly either *bait and switch (they made an offer and then changed it)* or outright *false advertising (they advertised something that wasn't true)*. Any judge will see that the retailer made a tempting offer (3 years free service, clearly marked in store promo material and on each box) and the unit for $149....now they are claiming that this is not the case....the retailer will be found at fault, the retailer will lose the case in a heartbeat, even though the blame is on RTV, which the retailers will go after RTV for the loss. I see a Class Action lawsuit coming from either consumers or the retailers against RTV.


----------



## NearlyGod

I don't know why I care so much since I didn't even buy any at this price. Sorry if I have offended anyone, but I just don't get the arguement that people are ripping off CC/RTV/RS. They sold the units for $150 with service included. I don't see that as the customer's fault.


----------



## avhokie

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Yeah, it's crazy to ask people to pay the actual price of the product instead of giving it away at a loss. Nuts.


Guys, the retailers dropped the ball here too. Try taking it up with them...*
ReplayTV and CC/RS/CompUSA can argue with each other all they want, but in the end, they sold units for $149 that included activation. Said so on the websites. Said so on the box. Said so in the box. They can't take that back after the sale.


----------



## Crrink

According to posts at Fat Wallet, even today, even after the big announcement on the Replay website, Customer Service is still telling people that if they bought their units at $500, they have 3 years of service, and then .99c a month afterward. No mention of lifetime at all, and it appears that they are still taking people at their word rather than asking for proof of how much they paid.


It appears that Replay can't get anything communicated to their CSR's in a timely fashion. What a joke of a company. You guys can bash TiVo all you want, they've never done anything THIS stupid and unprofessional.


I entered into a contract to buy a ReplayTV with 3 years of service for $150. CC confirmed it, ReplayTV's CSR's confirmed it, ReplayTV's web page confirmed it and CC's web page confirmed it. My money was taken and the contract was consummated. That OUGHT to be the end of the story, but no, Replay wants a do-over because somebody OTHER THAN ME made a mistake.


It's not going to be worth my time to fight this, although I'd likely win in small claims court. I won't call ReplayTV and lie, but if my unit goes from active to inactive, I will call and argue with them. If I don't get my way, the unit will go back and I'll be done with ReplayTV - likely for good.


I don't want to be a jerk to those of you who are happy with your ReplayTV's - I even posted in the Sonic Blue bankruptcy thread that I was happy to hear that DNNA stepped up and promised you all that your subscriptions would continue to remain active, but I really don't see how a company that manages a unit this poorly will be able to stay in business for very much longer.


The Replay product line has been lucky so far, surviving so many near death experiences. For the sake of those of you invested in the product and happy with it, I do truly hope that they continue to be lucky, or at least continue to provide the functionality you paid for.

For me, I think I'll be sticking with TiVo for as long as they last. Too bad I haven't gotten the chance to really get to know my ReplayTV, I was looking forward to being able to really compare the two platforms fairly.


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by NearlyGod_
*Everyone paid the price that was asked. The units where marked and sold at $150 w/ 3 years service. I'm missing your arguement.*
The argument was that the retailers were informed that there was an upcoming dramatic price change that was to be coupled with changes that would require re-marking the inventory and changing the sales literature. Some of the retailers sold units at the new pricing, before the pricing went into effect, and without making changes to the inventory as required.


Yes, Replay changed the deal and caused confusion. But if the retailers hadn't jumped the gun on the pricing, they might have carried out the second half of the equation without confusing the heck out of their customers.


----------



## winter

Anyone who doesn't think that the terms of a sale can be enforced needs to read the FW Dell WD 200GB drive thread. The jist of it was that two $100 rebates were listed on Dell's web site by error instead of one rebate causing the final price to be $22 instead of $122.


Long story short, after initially claiming that they were only going to honor one rebate they relented and everyone who ordered one got it for $22 after rebate. You can argue they wrote it off to goodwill but I think that once their lawyers got involved they realized they couldn't refuse to honor the terms of the purchase.


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by avhokie_
*ReplayTV and CC/RS/CompUSA can argue with each other all they want, but in the end, they sold units for $149 that included activation. Said so on the websites. Said so on the box. Said so in the box. They can't take that back after the sale.*
Try and see if you can wrap your head around this.


12/1 (made up date, don't know when this actually happens): DNNA tells retailers that the price structure will change on 12/17. $149 for a 5504, but it will no longer have activation. Please make the necessary changes.


12/17: retailer sells for $149, but does not inform customer there is no longer activation.


Wow that was short.


----------



## avhokie

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*The argument was that the retailers were informed that there was an upcoming dramatic price change that was to be coupled with changes that would require re-marking the inventory and changing the sales literature. Some of the retailers sold units at the new pricing, before the pricing went into effect, and without making changes to the inventory as required.


Yes, Replay changed the deal and caused confusion. But if the retailers hadn't jumped the gun on the pricing, they might have carried out the second half of the equation without confusing the heck out of their customers.*
If this was completely the retailers fault, then ReplayTV should give service to the customers and NOT reimburse the retailers for their mistakes.


----------



## Crrink

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Yeah, it's crazy to ask people to pay the actual price of the product instead of giving it away at a loss. Nuts.


Guys, the retailers dropped the ball here too. Try taking it up with them...*
EVERY SINGLE INVOLVED PARTY, the retailer, the manufacturer, and the consumer, agreed to the terms being $150 for a unit with 3 years of service.


Offering a product at a loss may be nuts, a consmer agreeing to take that offer is not.


This is not some simple case of a typo in an ad (which doesn't have to be honored) or a typo on a shelf tag (which does). This is the biggest screw up by a manufacturer/retailer that I've ever seen. Forcing the consumer to shoulder the burden of correcting it is not only ridiculous, but illegal.

As I pointed out before, I don't think it'll be worth my time to pursue this legally, even though that would be very easy to do in small claims court. I can return my unit to CC for the full price I paid for it. If I'm not satisfied, that's what I'll do.


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*The argument was that the retailers were informed that there was an upcoming dramatic price change that was to be coupled with changes that would require re-marking the inventory and changing the sales literature. Some of the retailers sold units at the new pricing, before the pricing went into effect, and without making changes to the inventory as required.


Yes, Replay changed the deal and caused confusion. But if the retailers hadn't jumped the gun on the pricing, they might have carried out the second half of the equation without confusing the heck out of their customers.*
Normally such a dispute would be between the customer and the retailer but this is an interesting case because the functionality that is in dispute is solely in the hands of the manufacturer, RTV. Whether or not the service is activated is in the hands of RTV, not the retailer. I can't go back to the retailer and make them provide service - they can't, only RTV can.


----------



## avhokie

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*Try and see if you can wrap your head around this.


12/1 (made up date, don't know when this actually happens): DNNA tells retailers that the price structure will change on 12/17. $149 for a 5504, but it will no longer have activation. Please make the necessary changes.


12/17: retailer sells for $149, but does not inform customer there is no longer activation.


Wow that was short.*
Then wrap your head around this:


Retailer sells unit with activation for $149. They paid $x to DNNA, where $x > $149.


DNNA does not refund retailers because they gave out activation.


Customers get activation.


End of story.


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*Try and see if you can wrap your head around this.


12/1 (made up date, don't know when this actually happens): DNNA tells retailers that the price structure will change on 12/17. $149 for a 5504, but it will no longer have activation. Please make the necessary changes.


12/17: retailer sells for $149, but does not inform customer there is no longer activation.


Wow that was short.*
Short but also incorrect - unless you saw the memo in question you don't know what DNNA told retailers. In addition please append this to your short list:


12/17 : Replay CSR telling customers who call that $149 price does include 3-year activation.


Now explain to me why its the retailers fault when RTV was giving out the same misinformation as the retailers?


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*Try and see if you can wrap your head around this.


12/1 (made up date, don't know when this actually happens): DNNA tells retailers that the price structure will change on 12/17. $149 for a 5504, but it will no longer have activation. Please make the necessary changes.


12/17: retailer sells for $149, but does not inform customer there is no longer activation.


Wow that was short.*
And customers are responsible for all this behind-the-scenes fumbling? Huh?


----------



## JWeavis

Quote:

_Originally posted by avhokie_
*If this was completely the retailers fault, then ReplayTV should give service to the customers and NOT reimburse the retailers for their mistakes.*
Damn, that was easy to come up with. I wonder why DNNA could come up with this idea.....


----------



## jay_k

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*Try and see if you can wrap your head around this.


12/1 (made up date, don't know when this actually happens): DNNA tells retailers that the price structure will change on 12/17. $149 for a 5504, but it will no longer have activation. Please make the necessary changes.


12/17: retailer sells for $149, but does not inform customer there is no longer activation.


Wow that was short.*
Short, but incorrect. 


I'm pretty sure the price change and activation status change was supposed to take effect today (12/22). The problem is that retailers changed the price on 12/17, before the activation status change took place.


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by JWeavis_
*Damn, that was easy to come up with. I wonder why DNNA could come up with this idea.....*
Because its easier to scr*w over the customers then to try to scr*w over the retailers whose lawyers wont allow it.


----------



## Crrink

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*Try and see if you can wrap your head around this.


12/1 (made up date, don't know when this actually happens): DNNA tells retailers that the price structure will change on 12/17. $149 for a 5504, but it will no longer have activation. Please make the necessary changes.


12/17: retailer sells for $149, but does not inform customer there is no longer activation.


Wow that was short.*
See if you can wrap your head around this.

On 12/17 many people from Fat Wallet walked into a CC, called a CSR, read a serial number off of a box and asked if the unit in question had 3 years of service.


Every single CSR said - why yes, silly man, don't you know that ALL 55xx's come with 3 years out of the box? Same information available on Replay's website, same information on CC's.

How again is that the consumer's fault?


Wow, that was short.

Try reading it slowly if you are still confused.


----------



## Will Collier

I think it's safe to say we haven't heard the last of this by a long shot. If DNNA's version is correct (the retailers jumped the gun), then the retailers are going to be liable for the activation costs, not the end purchasers. Even if the blame is mixed between DNNA and the retailers, neither can legitimately leave the already-paid customers holding the bag. That's just not going to fly legally, with the terms of sale written all over the boxes.


While this is (now) clearly a mistake, it's not a pricing typo. The sellers can't legally change the terms after the sale, even if they buffooned those terms. There will be more lawyers involved than DNNA's before this is all over (the preceeding is not an endorsement of lawsuits, just an observation)...


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by avhokie_
*Then wrap your head around this:


Retailer sells unit with activation for $149. They paid $x to DNNA, where $x > $149.


DNNA does not refund retailers because they gave out activation.


Customers get activation.


End of story.*
The retailer does not have the discretion to "give out activation". This is where you have gone wrong. So your example simply isn't valid.


This is what I believe:


If the retailers jumped the gun and changed price on 12/17 when it was really supposed to be 12/22, then customers should get their activation. Retailer loses.


If retailers were correct in changing the price on 12/17, then customers get no activation.


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by Crrink_
*If I don't get my way, the unit will go back and I'll be done with ReplayTV - likely for good.*
It sounds to me that you weren't interested in buying a Replay at the real price, correct? I mean no offense to you, but I'm not sure how Replay loses by not selling units to people who aren't willing to pay the real price for them?


They certainly lose by having all those units go out the door at (what we believe is) a loss..


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by Will Collier_
*If DNNA's version is correct (the retailers jumped the gun), then the retailers are going to be liable for the activation costs, not the end purchasers.*
I agree, and DNNA will have to recoup expenses from the retailers NOT the consumers. I think the retailers were aware of this too - case in point, apparently everyone who bought the 5504 from CC online received an email afterwards explaining the new price breakdown. Looks like they were trying to cleap up their own mess... problem is, they were too late.


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by Crrink_
*See if you can wrap your head around this.

On 12/17 many people from Fat Wallet walked into a CC, called a CSR, read a serial number off of a box and asked if the unit in question had 3 years of service.


Every single CSR said - why yes, silly man, don't you know that ALL 55xx's come with 3 years out of the box? Same information available on Replay's website, same information on CC's.

How again is that the consumer's fault?


Wow, that was short.

Try reading it slowly if you are still confused. *
Nobody ever laid claim that it was the consumer's fault. Certainly not me. the CSRs are idiots, thats not your fault either. Other people being wrong/stupid != to you being right. Read my above post.


----------



## jay_k

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*I agree, and DNNA will have to recoup expenses from the retailers NOT the consumers. I think the retailers were aware of this too - case in point, apparently everyone who bought the 5504 from CC online received an email afterwards explaining the new price breakdown. Looks like they were trying to cleap up their own mess... problem is, they were too late.*
The other problem is that retailers have more leverage than consumers. If DNNA tries to recoup activation costs from CC, CC might just say "OK, then we won't carry your product any more."


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*If retailers were correct in changing the price on 12/17, then customers get no activation.*
It doesn't matter if they were correct or not, the box and contents CLEARLY offered 3 free years of service. If DNNA was stupid enough to initiate a price decrease without pulling the items off the shelves (or at least explaining to retailers how to properly advertise the new price scheme), it's their fault.


Either way, customers get activation.


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*And customers are responsible for all this behind-the-scenes fumbling? Huh?*
Nope. That is why you get to return your unit for a refund. Somebody f-ed up. This does not imply you deserve anything for your trouble.


----------



## jay_k

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*It doesn't matter if they were correct or not, the box and contents CLEARLY offered 3 free years of service. If DNNA was stupid enough to initiate a price decrease without pulling the items off the shelves (or at least explaining to retailers how to properly advertise the new price scheme), it's their fault.


Either way, customers get activation.*
We might end up seeing some kind of compromise, where all $149 55xx units get one free year of activation, then you'd have to pay some fixed fee to get lifetime service, or go monthly.


Come to think of it, this isn't a bad business model. Give people a year to get hooked on Replay, then make 'em pay. I know there's no way I'd give up my Replay after a year...


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*It doesn't matter if they were correct or not, the box and contents CLEARLY offered 3 free years of service. If DNNA was stupid enough to initiate a price decrease without pulling the items off the shelves (or at least explaining to retailers how to properly advertise the new price scheme), it's their fault.


Either way, customers get activation.*
The point is that DNNA *did* explain to retailers how to properly do this. The simple fact is, places like CC aren't familiar with selling these sort of items, activation, no activation. It's complicated.


DNNA is probably stupid, that isn't in dispute. But evidence from pu82 suggests that retailers were informed, and simply didnt deliver. You have no evidence to support assertion that the retailers were not informed, while there has been evidence to the contrary.


----------



## winter

If this truly is the case where RTV told retailers to do X and the retailers did Y which resulted in this chaos, then why isn't RTV going after retailers to eat the activation costs? Their official announcement certainly sounds like they are siding with the retailers on this one.


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*Nope. That is why you get to return your unit for a refund. Somebody f-ed up. This does not imply you deserve anything for your trouble.*
So now there's no accountability? This is America. When somebody makes a mistake, people DO pay for it. That's at the very heart of our legal system.


----------



## jleavens

I'm still curious to know why people believe they deserve to be "enriched" (ie get service activation that should cost $300 for nothing) when they can be "made whole" by returning the unit to the retailer?


I guess I don't understand the feeling of entitlement. If I buy a computer and they promise that "it will work" and "you will be happy with it", I have 30 days to evaluate those claims for myself, and have the opportunity to get a full refund on all costs. No one here is claiming that any of this was purposeful, and I think anyone would be hard pressed to find any evidence that this was purposeful. The fact that you can get a full refund seems to me to mitigate the damages.


(Yeah, it's clear that I'm not a lawyer, but I watch a lot of "People's Court"  )


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by winter_
*If this truly is the case where RTV told retailers to do X and the retailers did Y which resulted in this chaos, then why isn't RTV going after retailers to eat the activation costs? Their official announcement certainly sounds like they are siding with the retailers on this one.*
Because it isn't clear that this is the case. Like I said earlier, if the retailers were actually supposed to lower the price on 12/17, DNNA is right to come after you. If they were supposed to lower the price on 12/22, then they should be going after the retailer.


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*The point is that DNNA did explain to retailers how to properly do this. The simple fact is, places like CC aren't familiar with selling these sort of items, activation, no activation. It's complicated.


DNNA is probably stupid, that isn't in dispute. But evidence from pu82 suggests that retailers were informed, and simply didnt deliver. You have no evidence to support assertion that the retailers were not informed, while there has been evidence to the contrary.*
Then RTV needs to take this up with its retailers. Its clear that the problem belongs to one or both of them - taking it out on the consumers who agreed to the terms and purchased the product is not the right (or legal IMHO) solution...


----------



## tarfin

Not sure where you got your understanding of business and consumer protection laws Ray but you might want to revisit that. This is called fraud -plain and simple. Sell a product that does x then remove x from the product. Doesn't matter how much was paid for it, the box and insert clearly stated 3 years of service. DNNA's CSRs stated that 3 years of service was included as well.


----------



## NearlyGod

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*It sounds to me that you weren't interested in buying a Replay at the real price, correct? I mean no offense to you, but I'm not sure how Replay loses by not selling units to people who aren't willing to pay the real price for them?


They certainly lose by having all those units go out the door at (what we believe is) a loss..*
The real losses are not going to be a straightforward as you seem to think. You are thinking short-term. This fiasco is going to hurt them further down the road when current owners and the people that are affected by their word of mouth opinion decide not to support a company that treats customers this way. Are the people who paid 150 and expected 3 yrs of service getting what they expected, as promised. No they are not. To further the issue, DNNA had been deactivating units that were activated the previous day. This is what worries me most as a current user. If they can just deactivate a unit, what is stopping hem from deactivating the 5040 that has been setting in my HTS for months and require more money to get it back up. If people back down from this issue and don't demand their 3 yrs of service regardless of price paid, then that may be the next step. (If you took that seriously, please reference Jonathon Swift. I was exaggerating to make a point.)


Finally $150 w/ 3 yrs of service is the issue and RTV needs to honor it with out getting the customers involved. They need to deal with CC and RS. And, may I add, it take some nerve to tell someone that received an item as a gift, that they need to find out how much was spent on that item. My Grandmother would flip out if someone told her she need to do that. This would would have been unthought of in past generations, but I guess times have changed.


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*So now there's no accountability? This is America. When somebody makes a mistake, people DO pay for it. That's at the very heart of our legal system.*
Haha, that is very clearly not at the heart of our legal system. But that is beside the point. That's just a random comment you threw in to make your post sound better.


There is accountability. CC is going to take your stuff back and give you a refund. They aren't legally required to offer you anything. Now, if they want to offer you a GC for your trouble, they can do so.


----------



## avhokie

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*The retailer does not have the discretion to "give out activation". This is where you have gone wrong. So your example simply isn't valid.
*
From everything I've heard, retailers paid some price for each unit that allowed them to sell the units with activation. DNNA told them to sell at a lower price and not include activation, and that the retailer would be credited for the activation fee. If the retailer decided to sell at the lower price with the activation, then DNNA should not credit the retailers.


----------



## avhokie

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*It sounds to me that you weren't interested in buying a Replay at the real price, correct? I mean no offense to you, but I'm not sure how Replay loses by not selling units to people who aren't willing to pay the real price for them?


They certainly lose by having all those units go out the door at (what we believe is) a loss..*
I wasn't really in the market, but couldn't resist this deal. And maybe with good service and support, I would have convinced my friends to buy ReplayTVs instead of Tivos.


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by tarfin_
*Not sure where you got your understanding of business and consumer protection laws Ray but you might want to revisit that. This is called fraud -plain and simple. Sell a product that does x then remove x from the product. Doesn't matter how much was paid for it, the box and insert clearly stated 3 years of service. DNNA's CSRs stated that 3 years of service was included as well.*
Again, what is stated on the box isn't relevent. DNNA has the discretion to change the terms of its offer. If they informed CC to take the damn stickers off, but CC never did, that is not DNNA's problem.


The point is, X was never given to you, so it could never have been taken away.


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*I'm still curious to know why people believe they deserve to be "enriched" (ie get service activation that should cost $300 for nothing) when they can be "made whole" by returning the unit to the retailer?*
I think people just feel like they were duped. It's just not right to be told one thing by a company, then have them go back and change everything after folks have paid money, hooked everything up, etc.


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_ There is accountability. CC is going to take your stuff back and give you a refund. They aren't legally required to offer you anything. Now, if they want to offer you a GC for your trouble, they can do so. [/b]
CC shipped the unit to me. That cost $22. Are they going to refund my shipping cost? Are they going to pay to have it shipped back to them? Yea right...


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by winter_
*CC shipped the unit to me. That cost $22. Are they going to refund my shipping cost? Are they going to pay to have it shipped back to them? Yea right...*
They damn well should. If they don't, then CC is the problem. I am 100% in agreement with you that you have a valid complaint if they don't refund shipping.


----------



## Will Collier

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*Again, what is stated on the box isn't relevent. DNNA has the discretion to change the terms of its offer. If they informed CC to take the damn stickers off, but CC never did, that is not DNNA's problem.
*
Quite right. But neither is it the buyer's problem, nor is it his/her responsibility to clean up for the retailer's (or DNNA's) mistake.


This looks an awful lot like an agreement that one side decided to change after the fact (even if the agreement was a mistake in the first place; that's not the buyers' fault). Whether it's ethical or not, the buyers have every legal right to hold DNNA and/or the retailers to the terms of that agreement...


----------



## NearlyGod

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*Again, what is stated on the box isn't relevent. DNNA has the discretion to change the terms of its offer. If they informed CC to take the damn stickers off, but CC never did, that is not DNNA's problem.


The point is, X was never given to you, so it could never have been taken away.*
So when you buy something you can't except it to include what is stated on the box, in a brocure, on a website and what is told to you buy the salespeople? Where do you live because I would love to sell you something, since you can't reasonably except to receive what I sell you. Isn't consumerism great?


----------



## Crrink

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*It sounds to me that you weren't interested in buying a Replay at the real price, correct? I mean no offense to you, but I'm not sure how Replay loses by not selling units to people who aren't willing to pay the real price for them?


They certainly lose by having all those units go out the door at (what we believe is) a loss..*
No offense taken.

Yes, you are correct. I have two TiVo's and I'm very happy with them. I would like a 3rd DVR for my workout room, but I haven't been willing to spend the ~$600 it would cost to get a 3rd unit.


I almost bit when Replay was offering refurb 5xxx units with lifetime for ~$350 (IIRC), but I hemmed and hawed long enough to miss the deal.


When this deal came along, I didn't even think about getting in on it until I read the confirmations from people talking with Replay CSR's - then I was all over it, and I was lucky enough to order a unit from CC before they went out of stock.


I agree that DNNA is probably losing money on this deal, but that's not my fault - they're losing money due to their own stupidity as well as that of their retailers - it's not my fault, and I have a valid contract that OUGHT to be honored according to it's terms.


Some people have suggested that Replay would win in the long run - once TiVo guys like me got one in our hot little hands, we'd quickly realize just how superior Replay really is over TiVo. We'd then Ebay our TiVo's and snap up every ReplayTV we could get our hands on.


I don't know enough about the economics of this product to know if that scenario is likely or not (my guess is that DNNA would still end up losing money overall), but what I do know is that if the terms of my contract are not honored, I'm not going to get to know this Replay unit well enough to determine if I really like TiVo better or not.

I'm also not going to be willing to look at ReplayTV first if I ever have to move from the TiVo platform - believe me, this has left a bad taste in my mouth, and I will diligently research any available alternatives.


I believe this was a screw-up, but it just shouldn't be hard to properly inform your CSR's to give out the correct information.


Let's see if I can give a decent analogy - This unit says it records 40 hours of TV. We all know that it only does that on the lowest quality setting. We also all know that the average consumer doesn't know that.


Suppose I buy a unit, leave it set to the highest quality setting, and take 3 months to fill it up. When I notice it's deleting stuff a lot sooner than I thought it would, can I call up Replay CSR and say - hey, you didn't sell me the product you advertised, I want my money back!!

No, I can't. They'll point out the section of the manual that explains quality settings, and let me know that the only way I'm going to get 40 hours out of this thing is if I watch it on a 9" screen without my glasses 

They'll say, sorry, sir, you agreed to the terms of service, and all of this was clearly spelled out, and you know what? They'd be correct.


All I am expecting them to do is honor the terms of the contract they freely offered through their retail chain. They would expect no less of me, I guarantee it.


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*Haha, that is very clearly not at the heart of our legal system. But that is beside the point. That's just a random comment you threw in to make your post sound better.


There is accountability. CC is going to take your stuff back and give you a refund. They aren't legally required to offer you anything. Now, if they want to offer you a GC for your trouble, they can do so.*
Maybe you should look up the definition of accountability. It IS the heart of our culture.


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_ Again, what is stated on the box isn't relevent. DNNA has the discretion to change the terms of its offer.
No, they really dont. Not once the purchase has been made.

Quote:

If they informed CC to take the damn stickers off, but CC never did, that is not DNNA's problem.
Yes, it really is DNNA's problem. If the retailers they selected arent doing their job then they need to take it up with the retailers, not leave the customers holding the bag


----------



## Wrecks

*Go back to the original announcement and read what it says at the end.*

*IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE DEAL YOU GOT, RETURN IT!*


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by winter_
*No, they really dont. Not once the purchase has been made.




Yes, it really is DNNA's problem. If the retailers they selected arent doing their job then they need to take it up with the retailers, not leave the customers holding the bag*
They changed the terms before you made the purchase, this is very clear.


The customers arent left holding anything. If CC jumped the gun, you get your activation. If they were right on 12/17, you don't get it. I don't think I can be any more clear.


----------



## Crrink

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*Nobody ever laid claim that it was the consumer's fault. Certainly not me. the CSRs are idiots, thats not your fault either. Other people being wrong/stupid != to you being right. Read my above post.*
...um...ok, so you're putting forth the idea that a retailer can sell a manufacturer's product and represent it any way he sees fit, and the manufacturer bears zero liability for this?


Sorry, that's not the way the law works, and that's also a crazy idea.


If that were the case then CC could sell you a cell phone under certain terms, and then when you get your first month's bill the service provider would be free to charge you whatever they felt like - all without informing you, all contrary to what is printed in the material they included with your phone, all contrary to what their CSR's told you when you activated.


It doesn't work that way - thank Goodness.


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*Maybe you should look up the definition of accountability. It IS the heart of our culture.*
You said the heart of our legal system, not culture. And seeing as how "our" culture is open to interpretation, I'm not going to agree or disagree with your new statement.


----------



## NearlyGod

Quote:

_Originally posted by Crrink_
*


Suppose I buy a unit, leave it set to the highest quality setting, and take 3 months to fill it up. When I notice it's deleting stuff a lot sooner than I thought it would, can I call up Replay CSR and say - hey, you didn't sell me the product you advertised, I want my money back!!

No, I can't. They'll point out the section of the manual that explains quality settings, and let me know that the only way I'm going to get 40 hours out of this thing is if I watch it on a 9" screen without my glasses 

They'll say, sorry, sir, you agreed to the terms of service, and all of this was clearly spelled out, and you know what? They'd be correct.


All I am expecting them to do is honor the terms of the contract they freely offered through their retail chain. They would expect no less of me, I guarantee it.*
Cudos...


This is the best example I've seen yet. I don't understand how anyone could argue against that logic.


ReplayLydon??? Are you out there? Please put an end to this madness and let RTV save some face by giving the people what they bought. If you have to cover your losses, then you need to talk it over with CC, et al.


----------



## avhokie

Quote:

_Originally posted by Wrecks_
*Go back to the original announcement and read what it says at the end.


IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE DEAL YOU GOT, RETURN IT!*
I like the deal I paid for, don't like the deal they are trying to change it to.


----------



## tarfin

Technically they did give me x. The unit works and downloads guide data, records, etc. Now I'm being told that unless I pony up $ it won't work.


Here's the definition of false advertising:


False advertising - misleading a consumer about some aspect of a product, which was an important factor in the consumer's decision to buy the product.


Taken from http://www.legalmatch.com/law-librar...and-fraud.html 


Special note here I'm not particularly interested in suing DNNA, but this is bait-and-switch at its best/worst. I've been a happy 5040 owner for several months but this experience may be enough to sour me on the company. The ONLY way DNNA has even an inkling of a chance at being right is if they told retailers to ship back the boxes for repackaging. Even then the CSRs and website were giving out the wrong information. IANAL but this is about the most slam dunk case of a winnable class action lawsuit that I've seen. This one SNAFU will flush the brand unless DNNA steps up and does the right thing. Its a sad note that customer service is non-existent in today's world. People are so gullible that they are led to believe that corporations can deceive you and all you can/should do is take it.


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by Crrink_
*...um...ok, so you're putting forth the idea that a retailer can sell a manufacturer's product and represent it any way he sees fit, and the manufacturer bears zero liability for this?


Sorry, that's not the way the law works, and that's also a crazy idea.


If that were the case then CC could sell you a cell phone under certain terms, and then when you get your first month's bill the service provider would be free to charge you whatever they felt like - all without informing you, all contrary to what is printed in the material they included with your phone, all contrary to what their CSR's told you when you activated.


It doesn't work that way - thank Goodness.*
No. In this case, the retailer should be held responsible. They aren't free to misrepresent product they sell.


Manufacturers can't be held directly responsible for the actions of the retailers. As for the CSR thing, yeah, they f-ed up royally there.


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by Wrecks_
*Go back to the original announcement and read what it says at the end.


IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE DEAL YOU GOT, RETURN IT!*
*I choose option 3 - I keep the unit under the terms I purchased it and they deliver the service they promised at the price they promised.*


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by tarfin_
*Technically they did give me x. The unit works and downloads guide data, records, etc. Now I'm being told that unless I pony up $ it won't work.*
This is referred to as the grace period.


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

I'm still curious to know why people believe they deserve to be "enriched" (ie get service activation that should cost $300 for nothing) when they can be "made whole" by returning the unit to the retailer?
Depends on what your interpretation of "made whole" is. One could argue that he should be "made whole" by getting what a retailer advertised and what he then purchased in reliance thereon.


I don't have much sympathy for people (like I almost was) who wanted to take shot at RS on a $149 unit and now must pay activation.


However, I really feel for subsequent ebay purchasers, unwitting (i.e. non-AVS) purchasers, and gift givers and their recipients of these units.


----------



## Zwingle

All indications point to RTV as the blame...not all but a large part. It looks as though all the retailers changed the pricing to the new pricing on the 17th. Unless they all conspired to do so, RTV told them to change the pricing on the 17th, the retailers were to blame for not pulling the stickers and the old bundling promo materials, BUT, RTV website remained the same after the 17th, stating that all the 5000 series get 3 years free service, and all the units on their website still showed the old pricing, why did they not make the Press release about the new pricing on the 17th if they told the retailers to change the promo and pricing? So who screwed up? I think blame goes to both equally.


----------



## rainbow_wahine

I don't read that they are going to deactivate all units that came online on or after 12/17. All I read is that RTV has gone to a new pricing structure and this is what it is.


I read in the original post that RTV is working with the retailers to *determine* the purchase price that the consumers paid. It doesn't say it *will* get them. It does, however, lead to a lot of speculation and questions. People that aren't sure will call........prove it and we'll turn you on. People that don't want to call, that are just plain disgusted, or don't want to make waves will return the unit back to the retailer. Some people get the new activation good 'til 1/1 will call........or again will just return the unit. Yes, some people will lie and some will fax fake receipts. Some will threaten and huffy and puffy. Again, some will return. Those people that are dishonest will lie if they feel they will get away with it whether it was a mistake or not. There's honest people just like there are dishonest people.


I guess it all boils down to whether or not the retailers kept good records. We'll see. If they do, it's just a matter of transmitting the info to RTV and we'll all be getting messages or cut off on the box fairly soon. Although I think that RTV wants their revenue from the subscriptions, I don't think they want to be ugly about it. If the retailers don't keep good records, then I don't think there's too much else to it. It's Christmas and the managers want to meet their quotas, not match up receipts.


I guess RTV could force a charge to the retailers if they don't provide any data, but that alienates the retailers and it looks like the majority of the retailers are involved in this.


So I still think that RTV is going to do all they can to throw up as many smoke and mirrors to shake out as many people to pay or return the items and after that....let it go....they have sales for the next quarter.


Oh and thinking that returning an open box will cause "open unit" sales. If there are that many....I'd guess RTV will take them back and in the summer resell them as refurbs with lifetime for $250.


Thanks for the post Jleavens. I know you are in a tight spot, being a retailer and yet a consumer and advocate on this board. I didn't read a lot of "the sky is falling" in your post.....but that's okay, there's plenty of that going on as it is.


**edit**my bad, Jleavens....I thought you sold RTV's at your site.......


----------



## j.m.

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Yeah, it's crazy to ask people to pay the actual price of the product instead of giving it away at a loss. Nuts.


Guys, the retailers dropped the ball here too. Try taking it up with them...*
Though perhaps both DNNA/ReplayTV and the retailers dropped the ball, it will be ReplayTV that ultimately suffers tremendously from this fiasco. It is a shame that you don't see that, as you are perhaps one of the few in a position to give input on things to people that matter there. For example, you might point out that many products are sold at a loss yet profits are still made from accessories (think game console & games, razor & blade, etc.) and suggest DNNA find some way to follow that pattern in the case of the units in question (perhaps by offering a reduced activation price for them...). (And yes I realize that it is a little different because one need only buy activation once, unlike razor blades. Thus, that is a factor to consider in determining the amount of the reduction.)


Anyone who knows much about business knows that a company's "goodwill" is often one of its most valuable assets. Well, ReplayTV just did so much damage to it that I doubt it will ever recover. You see, some people have bought the units in question as gifts, so ReplayTV's decision affects its image in the eyes of two people and all those with whom they share their story. Also, many of the units are the purchaser's/receiver's first DVR, which is a substantial foot in the door given the number of us who have become repeat buyers of ReplayTVs. In all likelihood, now MOST of these units will simply be returned, with all involved wishing they had gotten a Tivo (which already had a better image before this incident and after... ).


What bothers me the most as the owner of 3 ReplayTVs prior to all of this is that ReplayTV *continually* drops the ball, yet it consistently does very little in return to placate the customer it drops it on. In the current situation, for example, I don't necessarily expect ReplayTV to take the *entire* financial loss from this deal, but they should take *some* of it. A mere reduction in the price of activation by $75-$150 for the customers affected by this fiasco would be a gesture of goodwill that many would appreciate. Instead, what they've brought on themselves is a sudden spike in sales followed by massive returns, which at this point I truly hope hits ReplayTV hard enough that they finally learn a lesson.


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*I think people just feel like they were duped. It's just not right to be told one thing by a company, then have them go back and change everything after folks have paid money, hooked everything up, etc.*
Totally agree. Regardless of any arguments I make, I do think the situation sucks and never should have happened. But I also think that a lot of the attitude sucks, mostly at Fatwallet, and in the back of my head wonder if Replay might not have come across the Fatwallet thread and changed their mind on how to handle this.


Let's be realistic here. For the most part, this is not grandmas being prodded for their sales receipt. This is, for the most part, people trying to take advantage of the situation that they were fully aware of... And I can't say I blame them, I might have tried to myself if I thought I could just buy a unit and have it work. But I shudder to think that I would I become indignant when my attempt to take advantage didn't pan out.


But my opinions are my opinions, as always.


PS- If anyone calls Customer Service and gets information contrary to what has been officially announced, please get whatever info they can about who the rep is and forward it to me in a private message. I will follow up on them immediately with Replay. I think it is incredibly important that they give proper information at this time.


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by j.m._
*What bothers me the most as the owner of 3 ReplayTVs prior to all of this is that ReplayTV *continually* drops the ball, yet it consistently does very little in return to placate the customer it drops it on. In the current situation, for example, I don't necessarily expect ReplayTV to take the *entire* financial loss from this deal, but they should take *some* of it. A mere reduction in the price of activation by $75-$150 for the customers affected by this fiasco would be a gesture of goodwill that many would appreciate.*
Uhm, what about the fact that they're giving lifetime service on the units that paid the actual price instead of three-year?


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

This is, for the most part, people trying to take advantage of the situation that they were fully aware of... And I can't say I blame them, I might have tried to myself if I thought I could just buy a unit and have it work.
I agree wholeheartedly (see my post above yours).


However, I think it's a little overbroad to say that for the most part, people were trying to take unfair advantage of the situation. As great as fatwallet and AVS are for information, I'd still think that a majority of the RTV sales on these units were by bona fide purchasers with no knowledge of the "opportinity."


The problem IMO with DNNA's response is that it will alienate the unwittingly honest and well-intentioned "good guys and gals" in all of this.


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Uhm, what about the fact that they're giving lifetime service on the units that paid the actual price instead of three-year?*
Come on now...What's a realistic "lifetime" in these units anyway ? 5 years, tops? We're talking $12 a year after the third year. Whoopty-f-n-do.


----------



## rainbow_wahine

I don't think they'll suffer in the long run............


They may lose revenue from the subscriptions, however, the data they gain from the viewing habits is verrrry valuable. Just think of the advertisers that are willing the pay for that bit of information.


I think once the dust settles, it's all gonna be good!


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by brian7972_
*However, I think it's a little overbroad to say that for the most part, people were trying to take unfair advantage of the situation. As great as fatwallet and AVS are for information, I'd still think that a majority of the RTV sales on these units were by bona fide purchasers with no knowledge of the "opportinity."
*
On this account, I think you are wrong. You are vastly underestimating the power of the Hot Deals forum of places like FW and Anand, among others. I'd say Hot Dealers outnumber "bonafide" purchasers 10-1. That would be a very conservative estimate.


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*On this account, I think you are wrong. You are vastly underestimating the power of the Hot Deals forum of places like FW and Anand, among others. I'd say Hot Dealers outnumber "bonafide" purchasers 10-1. That would be a very conservative estimate.*
Yeah, I can see what you're saying and not sure I disagree, either. I am just thinking of the number of J6P holiday shoppers out there these past 2 weeks who aren't privy to the deals. You raise a good point...


----------



## prophet5590

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*This is referred to as the grace period.*
Is there anything in/on the 55xx that talks about a grace period? I thought it was all stickers and flyers and whatnot that said 3 years service. So, if someone gets one, and the box says 3 years, the flyer says 3 years, and after connecting to the RTV servers, the machine itself says 3 years, then how can you say they were not given 'X'?


If I had a 55xx and for a few days it said 3 years service, then one morning it said '10 days grace period, 1/1/2004 shutoff' I would definitely feel that something I originally had, had been taken away.


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by rainbow_wahine_
*I know you are in a tight spot, being a retailer and yet a consumer and advocate on this board. I didn't read a lot of "the sky is falling" in your post.....but that's okay, there's plenty of that going on as it is.*
Just to be clear: I'm not a retailer, I actually have a computer business .


I'm just a long-time fan of the platform, for all that it's done right and wrong, from owner to owner. I can be as much a cheerleader as I can be a bitter critic. I think Replay is in a terribly tight spot right now, and its disappointing because the move to unbundle service was the right move to make. It just seems like once again, for whatever reason, Replay does the right thing and everything goes wrong. Sonicblue, the previous owner, had the same troubles in different ways.


Replay may never be as big as TiVo, it may never have had a chance. But I certainly don't see that this is going to be the defining moment, make or break.


----------



## breaux124

I'm a long time ReplayTV owner (showstopper, and two 5040s). And since then I've turned four friends and five co-workers onto replayTV. My friend lived with his parents when he first got his 5040 last year. Since he moved about two months ago, his parents have been thinking about buying one.


His father went to CC this past saturday and decided to buy one at full price of $499 with 3 years of service included. At the register the unit rang up $150, so after being told it was recently reduced he decided to buy another for their bedroom. I talked to him this weekend, and told him the service probably isn't included at the $150 price. In the end he's still keeping one and paying full price for the service, but I know he was disappointed when we told him he'd probably have to pay full price for both if he wanted to keep them.


But he was still happy cause (150 + 300) is still cheaper than $499.


----------



## jay_k

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Totally agree. Regardless of any arguments I make, I do think the situation sucks and never should have happened. But I also think that a lot of the attitude sucks, mostly at Fatwallet, and in the back of my head wonder if Replay might not have come across the Fatwallet thread and changed their mind on how to handle this.


Let's be realistic here. For the most part, this is not grandmas being prodded for their sales receipt. This is, for the most part, people trying to take advantage of the situation that they were fully aware of... And I can't say I blame them, I might have tried to myself if I thought I could just buy a unit and have it work. But I shudder to think that I would I become indignant when my attempt to take advantage didn't pan out.
*
I have a feeling Replay did come across the FW thread, as all new postings to that thread are now being screened by FW moderators before they are posted. Even so, I think FW people are a small minority of the eventual recipients of these Replays.


I think, for the most part, these units will end up with Replay newbies either hearing about the good deal from a friend, or receiving it as a gift. I know I would be pretty mad if I received a gift that worked for a while, and then asked me for another $300 to continue using it, especially when it says right on the box that 3 years of service is included.


----------



## rayw69

I know it probably isn't clear from my posts, but I want people to get their units w/sub. I'm just never going to take the position that you deserve (morally or legally) the subs, or that DNNA benefits from letting you have them.


----------



## Crrink

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*I'm still curious to know why people believe they deserve to be "enriched" (ie get service activation that should cost $300 for nothing) when they can be "made whole" by returning the unit to the retailer?


I guess I don't understand the feeling of entitlement. If I buy a computer and they promise that "it will work" and "you will be happy with it", I have 30 days to evaluate those claims for myself, and have the opportunity to get a full refund on all costs. No one here is claiming that any of this was purposeful, and I think anyone would be hard pressed to find any evidence that this was purposeful. The fact that you can get a full refund seems to me to mitigate the damages.


(Yeah, it's clear that I'm not a lawyer, but I watch a lot of "People's Court"  )*
You know, I see your point of view, but I still have a problem with the way ReplayTV is going about all of this. Thankfully we have contract law to prevent stuff like this from happening (like I said it's not worth my time to fight this legally, but I do believe ReplayTV to be in violation of contract law - IANAL either).


What if you find out that the new house you bought is built on top of a goldmine - does the previous owner have any claim? Of course not - was he 'made whole' by the sale? Not really, but hey, he never looked for it, so, his loss. Once terms are agreed to and consideration is accepted, it's a done deal, plain and simple.


Now, a judge might rule that CC can make me whole by refunding my money - I don't know exactly how that works, but in my silly analogy, that would be like a judge making you whole by refunding the price you paid for the house and giving the rights of the goldmine back to the previous owner. How pissed would you be?!?!


Back to the real world - the other problem is that some retailers like CompUSA charge a 15% restocking fee. Now consumers wishing to be made 'whole' under your terms will have to fight with the retailer about that. That STINKS. *Maybe* CompUSA is aware of all this and will waive the restocking fee, but I doubt they will. It's a plain policy of theirs simply spelled out. Same problem with shipping costs, as pointed out by another post.


It's a bad move for ReplayTV to demand that people who legitimately bought these units under the most recent terms will have to provide proof. What's to stop ReplayTV from asking for proof again in a year? What's to stop Replay from discontinuing service to anyone who bought a floor model unit under whatever price threshold they deem important?


Nothing.

Nothing except contract law and whoever is willing to fight them on it. That ain't me. I'll keep my unit until I have to return it, and if it doesn't work by then, it'll go back, and I'll go back to keeping an eye out for any really good deals on a TiVo.


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by brian7972_
*Come on now...What's a realistic "lifetime" in these units anyway ? 5 years, tops? We're talking $12 a year after the third year. Whoopty-f-n-do. *
Okay, well consider that a $25 break on activation then.


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

It just seems like once again, for whatever reason, Replay does the right thing and everything goes wrong.
This is EXACTLY why I feel badly for everyone involved in this situation, including DNNA. There appears to be no intent whatsoever to pull the wool over anyone's eyes (like is usually the case in these types of situation). The only thing worse than DNNA taking the heat for this is if the bona fide unwitting purchasers take the heat (which it appears they are).


----------



## NearlyGod

Quote:

_Originally posted by rayw69_
*I know it probably isn't clear from my posts, but I want people to get their units w/sub. I'm just never going to take the position that you deserve (morally or legally) the subs, or that DNNA benefits from letting you have them.*
I agree that they should get the subs too, but why can't you agree that they are legally entitled to them? I'm trying to understand the other side of this situation?


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Okay, well consider that a $25 break on activation then.*
Yep, nice gesture, that's for sure. Just not enough nickels and dimes to assuage the sting if I was a BFP with a soon to be doorstop.


As your initial post alluded to, however, it's virtually impossible to determine who's an opportunist and who's a BFP...that's the rub and frankly, I haven't determined how I would have handled it either...tough one.


----------



## Diode1

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*The argument was that the retailers were informed that there was an upcoming dramatic price change that was to be coupled with changes that would require re-marking the inventory and changing the sales literature. Some of the retailers sold units at the new pricing, before the pricing went into effect, and without making changes to the inventory as required.

Yes, Replay changed the deal and caused confusion. But if the retailers hadn't jumped the gun on the pricing, they might have carried out the second half of the equation without confusing the heck out of their customers.*
For this to work in Replay's favor, they will need to prove that they made attempts to make packaging changes to the inventory channels in someway that would have excluded all advertisements of service was included in the sale of the product.

At this time I have not yet read any official release that Replay sent THEIR field sales reps to the retailers to provide retailers & warehouse distribution centers with either the means to make these packaging changes or do it them selves.

Changing the price alone does not get Replay off the hook, the truth in advertising laws are not that easy to sidestep. Again any & all official public information about these changes only took place today.

So then Why can I still go into my local CC store and find boxes with the advertised three years service included & these same statements are still on the display unit that the consumers use to base his/her purchasing decisions on.

I really don't think this is in anyway the fault of CC, as when they send out a corporate memo, ALL stores have it within seconds & the managers take the appropriate actions immediately, The lack of these measures to this date tells me that Replay still has not taken control of the situation and place a temporary fix with their press release and finally update to their own web site.

Yet this press release is not a fix to the truth in advertising laws that they are governed.

Most companies would either call back all product out in the channels, in this case open each to remove all statements within that advertise service included & additional service available at a given rate, and remove/modify the external advertisements. Or make the appropriate arrangements to have it done in the field.

Some companies just call back this inventory & sell it from other channels in liquidation sales. It looks to me like Replay tried to accomplish this on the cheap side.

Replay has a long road ahead of many fights; they can even to this date stop the bleeding as I believe that most of the current inventory is now in the consumersâ€™ hands, those few that are not can be modified to reflect the new changes, Replay should cut the loses, live up to the truth in advertising laws and eat this blunder and move on


----------



## j.m.

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Uhm, what about the fact that they're giving lifetime service on the units that paid the actual price instead of three-year?*
It is my understanding that this was the part of the change in pricing plan all along. They did not do that as a gesture of good will as a result of this mistake that has caused so much confusion, anger, and disappointment among new owners. What do *they* get as a result of this that they wouldn't have otherwise? Nothing. You will say they aren't entitled to anything, they can return it, etc. However, it is undisputable that MANY of these people bought units that in NO WAY included any evidence that they did not include service. What's more, the ReplayTV web site and CSRs (who are agents of ReplayTV) UP UNTIL TODAY *told* these people that service was included. Just as a matter of keeping them happy if nothing else, this created some kind of responsibility for ReplayTV to these customers. Whether that be in the form of a discount (even small) or something else, I don't care. The point is that it is not good business for DNNA to leave the customers holding the bag for its OWN mistakes, even if it has no contractual/legal obligation (though I think it might in at least some cases).


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by grimas_
*ReplayTV President Bernie Sepaniak commented on the companyâ€™s pricing move, noting: â€œReplayTV has always been committed to providing our customers with superior quality premium DVRs, offering the most powerful feature sets, highest recording capacity, as well as the industryâ€™s best overall value. With our new pricing model, weâ€™re making a ReplayTV DVR purchase even more attractive for consumers, providing unprecedented value, while allowing them to choose between either purchasing the lifetime service upfront or on a monthly subscription basis.â€
*
Did no one else notice this?!?!?!

*ReplayTV President Bernie Sepaniak commented*


So, what happened to Jim?
http://www.digitalnetworksna.com/com...lingsworth.asp


----------



## leesweet

Oh, I see... *you* expect the website to be *current*. Heck, I don't know what to believe any more.... someone trotting out a policy out as new, when it was the story of the day, when it was the on again, off again, policy for years....


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Uhm, what about the fact that they're giving lifetime service on the units that paid the actual price instead of three-year?*
Like I pointed out before....


Let's do the math:


old price:

Replay5504 for $499 with 3 years of activation


new price:

Replay5504 for $149 with no activation. Activation for lifetime is $299.


Old price now has 3 years upgraded to lifetime, that's cool.


But...

let's see $149+$299 is $448 and that's $51 less than the old price that some, like myself just paid!


----------



## stoptheshow

Bernie is the president of Escient.


----------



## rayw69

Quote:

_Originally posted by NearlyGod_
*I agree that they should get the subs too, but why can't you agree that they are legally entitled to them? I'm trying to understand the other side of this situation?*
I should clarify a bit.


If DNNA instructed the retailers to reduce the price of the units to correspond with the new activation policy on the 22nd, but the retailers jumped the gun and lowered the price on the 17th, then people are legally entitled to their activation. The retailers would eat the cost in this scenario. It would be like they had some sort of special sale.


That said, I consider this to be unlikely. If only 1 retailer had changed the price early, it would make some sense. The fact that CC, Amazon, Good Guys, RS, all changed the price on the 17th suggests that the 17th was the date of the policy change. If this scenario is true, then the people who purchased on the 17th should not get activation. The fact that the boxes stated there was activation was irrelevent. There were reports of some CC's having the sticker written over in black marker, and of workers at CC stating that the sticker on the box was no longer true at the new price. This, combined with pu82's post that retailers were notified early, suggests to me that the retailers are to blame for not informing customers that the new price meant there were new terms.


This is the basic logic of my arugment.


----------



## leesweet

Yeah, that may have been a typo... the Escient website still has him there, and Google doesn't show anything about changes at Escient or ReplayTV... bet the PR department f-ed up. Gee....


(I just can't stand this level of incompetence...)


If it's not clear, ReplayTV, Escient, and Rio are all holdings of DNNA:
http://www.dm-holdings.com/media_pre...ail.jsp?id=664


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*Maybe you should look up the definition of accountability. It IS the heart of our culture.*
If I can buy a coffee at McDonald and then spill it on myself, I get burnt because I was sold "hot" coffee. I then sue for $1M and win... well, let's just say there are major problems with our legal system.


----------



## stoptheshow

There has been recent speculation that the Replay unit was going to be folded into Escient, so maybe this isn't a mistake.


ReplayLyndon - are you in Indiana now?


For those of you who dont know, Escient is a very cool company who makes quite a few network powered multimedia devices. They have been innovating in this space for many years.


----------



## tarfin

BFP and J6P? Can someone define those for me please?


Ray I'm not trying to make this personal but why do you think that DNNA could change its policy but not inform consumers through either its website or its CSR line, nor change the packaging to reflect the new policy yet you feel it did nothing wrong? I'm not following that unless of course you're a stock holder?


----------



## Jeff D

One person can answer the question:

Justin... Is Jim or Bernie the Pres of ReplayTV? If it's not Jim, what happened? This should be public knowledge, D&M is a public company.


----------



## tluxon

First of all, my bias is affected by the D&M Holdings rescue (although it could be only temporarily) of ReplayTV from what appeared at the time to be impending doom less than a year ago. I haven't been real happy with the way DNNA has run the ship, but I'm giving them a little more leeway because of their rescue and the fact that I love Denon & Marantz products. Bottom line is I hope they figure out how to keep ReplayTV afloat for the long haul, because I think there's awesome potential for it in a fully integrated home theater setup.


It was pretty clear to me that until today DNNA's official position was that all 55XX units included 3 years activation AND that the pricing model hadn't changed yet. Since we saw no official word directly from DNNA (only indirectly through resellers) that the new pricing was effective until today, it looks like we have a salesman who sold a $400 value item for $150.


Fair or right or not, I believe that unless there's some fine print somewhere that was being misrepresented by the salesman, all units that had stickers plastered all over them claiming 3 years of service SHOULD HAVE THAT SERVICE, regardless of the selling price. IMO, those who were never told directly via signage or a salesman that you were getting service and the unit for $150 have no beef.


I've seen a lot of justifying "claims" that ReplayTV's website and CSRs were touting 3 years service. Of course they were - ReplayTV's website was selling units under the old pricing the whole time. Their official position was that units were $449 and included 3 years activation. What clouded the issue was when "outside representatives" of their product indicated otherwise.


Some people suggest that DNNA should've changed the model number. I'm not sure how they could do that on units that are in distribution centers already boxed up? Besides that, the model number is embedded in the serial number which is already burned into the unit. Seems like it would've been impossible to change serial numbers.


Maybe DNNA will take a big hit on this fiasco, but maybe not. The number of people who are truly going to feel screwed over by this deal is relatively small in the big picture, and their complaints will fade away in the night as the sun rises on new priorities. I also believe the "gift" argument is way overblown - certainly the vast majority of buyers were buying it for themselves (can you say, "single tuner"?). I have three and I don't want any more (that don't do HD), but I wouldn't want any less.


I'm glad DNNA took some time in taking this official stance that they obviously thought long and hard about. It's not the way I would've done it, but they have a lot more at stake than we do and it was their call to make.


Cheers,


Tim


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

_Originally posted by Jeff D_
*If I can buy a coffee at McDonald and then spill it on myself, I get burnt because I was sold "hot" coffee. I then sue for $1M and win... well, let's just say there are major problems with our legal system.*
We're getting way OT here, but I'm compelled to chime in: (A) the woman who sued received third degree burns and required skin grafts over 6% of her body, including areas where you and I would not like to be burned (assuming we were women and HAD those areas, of course); (B) she offered to settle for $20,000, which McDonald's refused; (C) the multimillion dollar verdict she received was subsequently reduced on appeal to $480,000; (D) the jury found her 20% at fault and reduced her damages accordingly; (e) she and McDonald's ultimately entered into a private settlement agreement (presumably for less than the $480,000); and (F) the coffee was served at 180 degrees even thought McDonald's quality assurance manager testified on the stand that dangers arise with beverages at only 140 degrees.


I know you were taking a dig at the legal system (which is fine, we deserve it!), but wanted to chime in regarding the real facts of the McDonald's suit (which I learned all about while in law school). The legal profession has myriads of other targets at which to lob criticism, but this really isn't one of them. 


P.S. I'm a commercial litigator, and have never handled a personal injury case.


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

BFP and J6P? Can someone define those for me please?
Sorry, "BFP" is law school speak for "bona fide purchaser" and "J6P" is AVS-speak for "Joe Six Pack."


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*I think Replay is in a terribly tight spot right now, and its disappointing because the move to unbundle service was the right move to make. It just seems like once again, for whatever reason, Replay does the right thing and everything goes wrong. Sonicblue, the previous owner, had the same troubles in different ways.*
I just don't understand why they didn't keep the 55XX model at its current pricing, and then release NEW models with the new pricing (e.g. 56XX). Then, there would have been no confusion at all, and the consumer could save a little money by buying the newer models and activating for life. I understand its expensive to do such things, but its gotta be cheaper than losing $300/unit.


When a company tries to initiate a huge change in the pricing of their service - like DNNA is doing right now - they have to be prepared for some fumbling during the turnover. The product itself is already confusing to consumers (for the most part), so I don't understand how they didn't see this SNAFU coming a mile away. Certainly, they must have anticipated some problems, but probably not to this degree (thanks to FW). Now it seems as if they are backpeddling until they figure out what to do. Let's hope they do the right thing and live up to their promises. On the other hand, if the retailers are at fault for jumping the gun, let's hope they live up to that - and not expect DNNA to reimburse them for the loss.


----------



## toots

Hmph.


A while back when I bailed on ReplayTV, someone (in another forum) asked me what it'd take to get me to buy ReplayTVs again.


I said, "probably about 3 years of operating without another major screw-up like version 5 or that time they deactivated everyones' 4500s or all those times when their ordering system was completely broken or..."


Just as official notice:


The clock just got reset back to three years.


Don't care whose fault this can be explained away as. Problems like this follow ReplayTV like flies, and given the pattern, the ultimate conclusion is that ReplayTV's at least somewhat responsible.


----------



## Jeff D

OT: Toots, you got directivos? I got two and I love them!!! Love may be a bit soft for how I really feel. And at $50 each (no one screwed up!!!) I couldn't say no.


----------



## tarfin

Thanks for the clarification Brian. Your contributions are appreciated.


----------



## Jeff D

I just realized toots said something that's pretty dead on...
Quote:

Don't care whose fault this can be explained away as. Problems like this follow ReplayTV like flies, and given the pattern, the ultimate conclusion is that ReplayTV's at least somewhat responsible.
How can you not see ReplayTV is at fault? If you've been here more than a month you know what I mean.


ReplayTV no matter which comany, ReplayTV and SonicBlue have a proven track record regarding major screwups. DNNA is sticking with the ReplayTV business practice of screwing up.


If anyone is ever to say "class action" and DNNA I think there's a pretty good case for who should be held accountable. The company that has a proven record of screwing up is most likely the one to blame.


*I think it's also odd that Lyndon has been put on quiet mode. He hasn't said one thing publically about this.*


----------



## toots

Quote:

_Originally posted by Jeff D_
*OT: Toots, you got directivos? I got two and I love them!!! Love may be a bit soft for how I really feel. And at $50 each (no one screwed up!!!) I couldn't say no.*
That would more or less require me to get DirecTV, which is something I steadfastly refuse to do, for reasons that stem largely from my basic grumpiness more than anything else.


So, no, I haven't.


I got a series 2 and one of those Pioneer DVR-57H combo TiVo/DVD burner units.


Waiting a bit for the checking account to recover before I replace my remaining 4000s.


Can't say it's love (the UI still sucks), but the reliability and the fact that TiVo isn't pulling continuous boners sure makes the ownership experience much easier than I've had from post-4000 series ReplayTVs.


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

Don't care whose fault this can be explained away as. Problems like this follow ReplayTV like flies, and given the pattern, the ultimate conclusion is that ReplayTV's at least somewhat responsible.
Right-o. I'm aware of the entire history and am a RTV convert/addict, but in light of these situations, how can I possibly recommend that my mom/dad/bro/sis/aunt/boss/colleague get one of these? I'm less apt to preach the RTV gospel when these things happen (and RTV knows that "advertisers" like me are as good as gold).


----------



## j.m.

Quote:

_Originally posted by brian7972_
*(and RTV knows that "advertisers" like me are as good as gold).*
Well, that's the problem, isn't it? Apparently, they don't.


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

I think it's also odd that Lyndon has been put on quiet mode. He hasn't said one thing publically about this.
Good catch Jeff - I noticed that too. I think it's not only odd (which is OK), but it's probably pretty smart in this situation. I feel for Lyndon because he probably has a MILLION things he wants to say but has been told he shouldn't or can't.


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by brian7972_
*Good catch Jeff - I noticed that too. I think it's not only odd (which is OK), but it's probably pretty smart in this situation. I feel for Lyndon because he probably has a MILLION things he wants to say but has been told he shouldn't or can't.*
Perhaps he's the one supplying jleavens with the inside information.


----------



## toots

Quote:

_Originally posted by j.m._
*Well, that's the problem, isn't it? Apparently, they don't.*
I recently purchased my Pioneer DVR-57H (TiVo) at a local Tweeter. Recently, our very own Heathriel visited that Tweeter for the Demo days thing, and word has it, she put on quite the sales job.


When doing the paperwork, the salesguy (with whom I have a pretty good relationship) said, "I thought you were a ReplayTV person. Why are you buying a TiVo?"


I really, _really_ don't like to trash-talk anyone's products in a place of business like that. I'm not being paid to sell (or not sell) someone else's products, and I really don't want to be in the position of blowing off my mouth and screwing some other guy's sale.


On the other hand, I didn't want to lie to this guy. I tried putting it as tactfully as I could. I said that I had some issues with ReplayTV's reliability and the way they treat their customers, and I was currently waiting for them to rebuild my confidence in their brand.


Sadly, at least with this salesguy, I may have undone all of Heathriel's good work.


----------



## Jeff D

I just posted this elsewhere:


Having worked retail and being an "old school" guy I believe "the customer is always right". I kissed more customer's butts than I ever thought I should, or wanted to...



I guess times have changed and this should now be "the customer is always right. Unless we did something wrong and then the customer is to be held accountable for our mistake."



I find it 100% WRONG for a problem between a manufacture and retailer be the responsibility of the consumer. Without a doubt YOU NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR YOUR ACTIONS. Period. If DNNA screwed up then they should do the "right thing".


I don't think the retailers are at fault. If so how do you explain almost all of ReplayTV's distribution channels acting in the same way? There's only one explaination that makes sense... DNNA said to do it. I'm not sure about CompUSA and MagnoliaHiFi, I didn't check them out. CircuitCity, Fry's, Radio Shack and Amazon all had the same price change with-in a day of each other last week.


Mighty suspicious for DNNA to say it's the retailer's fault. DNNA can't afford to piss off the retailers, that's well know. A product manufacturer won't survive if it can't get the product into the consumer's hands.


----------



## vry

How can you tell if your replay 5040 from RS has the 3 year service? Would it be the $499 or $149 unit? And is it automaticly getting switched over to lifetime service? Or do you need to prove this to them as well?


I'm so confused...

So tempted to just box this thing back up and return it.


Thanks


----------



## Jeff D

I wouldn't care about Lyndon's quietness.

I think Lyndon is busy fighting fires... I can't beleive he isn't more busy than "normal".


----------



## toots

Quote:

_Originally posted by vry_

I'm so confused...

So tempted to just box this thing back up and return it.

[/b]
You know, you just can't buy word-of-mouth advertising and customer loyalty like this.


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by Jeff D_
*I find it 100% WRONG for a problem between a manufacture and retailer be the responsibility of the consumer. Without a doubt YOU NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR YOUR ACTIONS. Period. If DNNA screwed up then they should do the "right thing".


I don't think the retailers are at fault. If so how do you explain almost all of ReplayTV's distribution channels acting in the same way? There's only one explaination that makes sense... DNNA said to do it. I'm not sure about CompUSA and MagnoliaHiFi, I didn't check them out. CircuitCity, Fry's, Radio Shack and Amazon all had the same price change with-in a day of each other last week.


Mighty suspicious for DNNA to say it's the retailer's fault. DNNA can't afford to piss off the retailers, that's well know. A product manufacturer won't survive if it can't get the product into the consumer's hands.*
Well said.


I dont know for sure but I read on the FW thread earlier on that Ingram Micro, a distributor that many online stores use, had dropped their price on 12/17 and it seems possible that these retailers automatically picked up the price drop that way. That of course begs the question - who told Ingram to drop the wholesale price on Replay's? Hard to believe the answer isnt DNNA.


----------



## JWeavis

Quote:

_Originally posted by toots_
*You know, you just can't buy word-of-mouth advertising and customer loyalty like this.*
My brand new 5504 is back in the box also. It was headed for my parent's house as an XMas gift (bought it Saturday). I guess I'll just have to get them a TiVo since that's what they had actually asked for (as I also told the CSR).


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by vry_
*I'm so confused...

So tempted to just box this thing back up and return it.*
I know it's not easy, but try and hold out a bit longer. I think everyone should wait until there is a clear and definite announcement from DNNA about all this. For all we know, they are disputing with their lawyers as I type this. You could always hang onto it and if, in the future, you lose service - just call and explain the situation. It seems they are granting people activations when they call (from FW).


----------



## Hankcampbell

Okay, I bought two Replays ( a 4504 and 5040 ) for Christmas gifts a few weeks ago ... from the Replay thing on Ebay. They were both 3-year activation.


They won't be opened until Christmas and maybe not activated until the day after. Does this new craziness mean they won't be able to properly activate their Replays without paying again, or do I have to document the purchase?


Wow ... I never thought I would get fed up with these guys. I own two 4xxx machines and love them ... but having spend hundreds and getting a lot of hassle activating them for family members will really neg me out.


----------



## bsoplinger

Its 7pm here on the east coast, and I sure can't find anything on Replay's site yet. I was out getting a cable I needed and looked and sure enough, at my local CompUSA they still have green tagged boxes with no signage that says anything about activation required. This is simply a complete and total mess!


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by Hankcampbell_
*Wow ... I never thought I would get fed up with these guys. I own two 4xxx machines and love them ... but having spend hundreds and getting a lot of hassle activating them for family members will really neg me out.*
You are starting to get an understanding of what I said many times before. Each time ReplayTV seems to out-do themselves. The trump the last major f-up with another more ingenious screw up. For example:


12/2002 - Lay off most of the US support and switch to India based phone support. This was all right before Christmas.

2/2003 - Rebate from the Christmas season are now getting delayed and people are pissed off about the rebates which look like they aren't going to be paid.

3/2003 - Chapt 11, oh now those rebate checks aren't looking so bad, you are now thinking you've got a $500 doorstop.

4/2003 (good news! DNNA buys ReplayTV/Rio from SonicBlue for like $30M. Can you say DEAL? SB lost close to $100M from what they paid for ReplayTV, and they had to throw in the Rio line to get the sale!)

4/2003 - 5040 refurb clear out, many with the original (or worse) problems. many units don't work, it's as if nothing was ever done to these boxes except given a new SN, packed up and shipped out.

6/2003 - 5.0 software release, oh hell, I don't need to say anymore, but people aren't happy. The approval rating of ReplayTV is dropping faster than Gray Davis'.
_edit:

8/2003 - DNNA/ReplayTV go back on the earlier promise that the 4k and 5k units will have interoperability. This plan has been sh&tcanned for the "trade in your mismatched replayTV" plan where you trade in your working replayTV for a refurbed replacement after the previous refurbished problems this is a risky "upgrade" gamble. (Thanks tluxon for reminding me.)_

11/2003 - Nother round of layoffs, not that big a deal, but something strange is going on.

12/2003 - Oh new price on the 5504?!?! It's $149 in the stores with activation! Yeah!!! Gifts galore!

12/2003 - Just kidding! There is a new pricing plan, but it's not what you thought and we're holding you accountable.


Did I miss any? There's got to be something. Anyway there's bound to be something crazier just around the corner.


Fasten your seat belts, it's continuing to be a bumpy ride...


----------



## Pete Rod

jleavens,


I hope you don't mind but I copy and pasted your post on a auction listing I posted on ebay. I am sure that this will help a few from getting taken and I am sure it will be pulled by ebay before it ends.


Ebay item number 3067255744


----------



## tluxon

Jeff, did you have to remind us? I'm glad you didn't mention the whole inter-op fiasco that drove the trade-in program - which was very generous to those of us who were stupid enough to buy 5Ks that didn't yet work with our 4Ks but left out those who were smart enough to wait until interop was reality. Then what about the credit card charges on those trade-in units that were billed way before the replacement units ever shipped.


There's no question that the technical/creative _potential_ of the ReplayTV is superior to that of any other DVR out there, but we'll be lucky to ever see it come to fruition with the way it's been managed. Curse of The Bambino?


Tim


----------



## jones07

Quote:

_Originally posted by lizard_boy_
*I may have missed this elsewhere, but are the prices going up for people with 5000-series units that were activated at $9.95/month long before this snafu? I have a few friends who purchased 5040's when buy.com had them for ~$125 and chose $10/month instead of lifetime activation.*
Does anyone know the official word on this. ? I ask the same thing in it's own thread and only got two users giving their opinion but *NO OFFICIAL WORD* from DNNA. I called up DNNA twice an got two completely different answers. One said my 9 month old 5040 will stay at $9.95 the other said it will go up to $12.95 

Speaking as a big Fan of Replay I'm really really getting sick of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing with this brand. My guess (going by how this company is run and how they change their price plan more then some people change under-ware ) they most likely have not even given it a thought yet. And users will not know until we find a charge of $12.95 on our cc. Also Is going life time going to cost $250 or $300. It's to late for me. to go LT on an 9 month old unit but I would like to know anyway.


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by Pete Rod_
*jleavens,


I hope you don't mind but I copy and pasted your post on a auction listing I posted on ebay. I am sure that this will help a few from getting taken and I am sure it will be pulled by ebay before it ends.


Ebay item number 3067185645*
I'm not a seller of these, but I don't understand why you did that. There has been NO OFFICIAL response from DNNA about anything, and people have been reporting successes and failures across the board. I think we should all relax until further notice. And please, no more rumor starting without verification.


----------



## Pete Rod

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*I'm not a seller of these, but I don't understand why you did that. There has been NO OFFICIAL response from DNNA about anything, and people have been reporting successes and failures across the board. I think we should all relax until further notice. And please, no more rumor starting without verification.*


It is official. From the ReplayTV website;


GOOD NEWS!


ReplayTV announces new, lower pricing. You can now buy a ReplayTV DVR for as low as $149.99. And you now have a choice of two service options. Choose monthly service for only $12.95 or product lifetime service for $299.


Anybody getting a new 5504 non-active off ebay will have to pay for service.


----------



## dewolfxy

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Unless you got it anonymously, it's not like you couldn't ask the giver to fax the information to Replay for you... They don't even have to send the price info to the gift recipient.


Where it *will* suck will be for the people who paid more than $150 for a Replay on eBay with the claim that it was activated.*
I grant you it can be done, it's merely that I think this isn't a pleasant thing to have to request from someone who gave you a gift. Not everyone has access to a fax machine, too, although I suppose they would let you mail it. Maybe I can claim I got mine in an anonymous Secret Santa gift exchange. Yep, that's where I got it ...


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by Pete Rod_
*It is official. From the ReplayTV website;


GOOD NEWS!


ReplayTV announces new, lower pricing. You can now buy a ReplayTV DVR for as low as $149.99. And you now have a choice of two service options. Choose monthly service for only $12.95 or product lifetime service for $299.


Anybody getting a new 5504 non-active off ebay will have to pay for service.*
What you posted doesn't address the issue at all. We all know about the new pricing scheme. What we don't know is how DNNA will respond to all the units with pre-activation that were bought PRIOR to today's price/service change - regardless of the purchase price of the unit ($499 or $149). Of course, this is assuming all those on eBay were originally purchased before today.


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by toots_
*I got a series 2 and one of those Pioneer DVR-57H combo TiVo/DVD burner units.
*
Other than your UI issues, how do you like your Pioneer box? Is it well integrated? Does it work well? I think products like that are stand DVR's future.


/carmi


----------



## firstwitness2000

just called replaytv and got my 3 years free service activated. I told them that the box mentioned nothing about needing to be activated, and that I received the Replaytv unit as a gift.


----------



## jones07

Did you actually received the ReplayTV unit as a gift or did you lie ?


----------



## MrO

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*If I buy a computer and they promise that "it will work" and "you will be happy with it", I have 30 days to evaluate those claims for myself, and have the opportunity to get a full refund on all costs.*
Unless you got it at Compusa, in which case you have 14 days to return it, and pay 15% for opening the box to evaluate it.


----------



## s.bradford

I just have to post my .02Â¢.


I had no interest in this offer. I purchased my Replay after the announcment DNNA was taking over as I have always preferred the Replay interface over Tivo, and was concerned about sonic blue's longevity.


I am happy with my 5080. I was also very happy with DNNA's announcment that they would not be raising their service fees. That announcement made only a few months ago.


And whatever genius decided to once again bundle service (I guess to simplify things??), well that wasn't really my concern.


Now another genius notices that Tivos and Replays are sitting on the shelf side by side during the Xmas season with a $300 price discrepancy and decides to rush through this new price/service policy, and with the new low prices, they decide to hike the service rates. That's ok too... it's their service.


But... as of today I have come to the conclusion that the current DNNA management feels very much OK with the fact that whatever they say today has nothing to do with what they will say tomorrow. Quite frankly I am now waiting for the next software download that will disable CA and IVS in 5000 units.


Bottom line... in the past I talked up Replay to my friends (one of which bought one for himself and one for his parents), and today I am silent. I will continue to enjoy my 5080 until it breaks, or I choose HDTV, or even if I switch from cable to satellite, at which time I will feel relieved that my next DVR hardware/service investment will be with a company that is less likely to do a complete about-face every time they think it suits them.


Poor show DNNA, poor show indeed.


----------



## firstwitness2000

i did receive it as a gift, actually


----------



## brian7972

For those wondering if this is issue a big deal or not, just compare the number of views and posts in this thread since the eight hours it's been up versus the wireless streaming thread that's been around for 2 months.


----------



## jones07

Quote:

_Originally posted by s.bradford_
*I just have to post my .02Â¢.


But... as of today I have come to the conclusion that the current DNNA management feels very much OK with the fact that whatever they say today has nothing to do with what they will say tomorrow. Quite frankly I am now waiting for the next software download that will disable CA and IVS in 5000 units.


Poor show DNNA, poor show indeed.*
Indeed. the past 4 days have shown that DNNA can give and take away at the speed of a Download


----------



## tedler

Quote:

_Originally posted by jones07_
*Indeed. the past 4 days have shown that DNNA can give and take away at the speed of a Download*
Yeah, I was always under the impression (with my 1 year old 5040) that once the service went to "one-time fee paid" on my Replay that they couldn't alter it any further...obviously not.


----------



## melduforx

This whole thread is freaking amazing. There are a bunch of people who are arguing that yes, Replay should honor the $150 price including activation. Those same people probably know well enough (even at the time of purchase) that this was a mistake.


I find it amazing that people aren't willing to pay a fair price for a product.


In the end, if you take it back you are no worse off than you were before you had the (mistakenly priced) Replay.


If you don't want it, take it back. Stop crying about something so insignificant.


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by jay_k_
*I agree...any cost savings they realize by denying people activations would pale in comparison to the number of returns they'll get, and the badwill they've generated. Especially with so many people giving these as holiday gifts...the recipient's first (and probably only) experience with Replay will be that they lied on their packaging.*
Here are some numbers to consider:


Activation costs $300 lifetime or $13 a month.


That means that even if they lose all value for their returned hardware, if the get one of two people to activate, it is cheaper to do this than just activate. Given that they probably do not lose all value, they probably only have to win one in three.


Having said that, it seems unlikely that this brand will recover from this fiasco.


What stuns me about this whole thing is that ReplayTv has done this correctly twice and then when owned by a pair of established CE brands, they totally screw it up.


During retail's busiest period, they decide to change their pricing model without changing model numbers (as they have twice before). Then they are surprised that their retail partners do something that they did not expect (I have no idea which party is responsible, but net net, it is their problem).


Next they do not even make sure that *their own* customer service people are properly informed about what they are doing, adding to this confusion.


Many boxes get sold (based on what might have been available at retail) let us guess between a low of 2,000 and a high of 10,000 (very, very, high). If 5,000 were sold, this is a $1.5 million mistake (using lifetime service prices).


Instead of taking this cost hit, they decide to try to customers to take instead, figuring that they are not in a strong enough position to force their retail partners to eat it or even split it with them.


This is likely to cause two new problems for them: first one or more class action lawsuits (these will do nothing to make their customers really happy as even if they get free service they will be so angry by that point that it likely will not mater) and will generate a very large number of open box returns, further angering their retail partners.


Based on what was said in *this* thread, they have laid off their QA staff, most of their hardware and software people and moved what is left to Indiana to work on Eschient, they have no plans for this brand. They also do not care about customers at this price point as most of their other products are aimed at high-end customers.


I feel sorry for those ordinary people that bought these as gifts not knowing anything else. Everyone on here knew at least there was a possibility that this was a mistake. While I think DNNA is in a legally shaky position, I cannot say I will shed tears for those of you that lose this one.


/carmi


----------



## jones07

I wondered how long it would take "Doom an Gloom" majortom to show up again.


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by tluxon_
*There's no question that the technical/creative potential of the ReplayTV is superior to that of any other DVR out there, but we'll be lucky to ever see it come to fruition with the way it's been managed. Curse of The Bambino?
*
Man even here I can't escape the constant reminder of The Babe and my cursed Sox.... Thanks Tim.


For bringing that up I'm editing my original timeline to include the 4-5k non-op problem. =)


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by melduforx_
*This whole thread is freaking amazing. There are a bunch of people who are arguing that yes, Replay should honor the $150 price including activation. Those same people probably know well enough (even at the time of purchase) that this was a mistake.*
I did not buy one of these boxes, and agree that many people here knew this might be a mistake, however, I do think that they are legally correct. It does not really mater whose mistake it is (that would just determine would be responsible for these costs), they bought a product with a set up terms listed on displays and even on many product boxes themselves. Either DNNA or their retail partners needed to change this material and since they did not, they will likely be held responsible.

Quote:

*I find it amazing that people aren't willing to pay a fair price for a product.*
People are willing to pay a fair price for a product, they just disagree with you on what a fair price is. It is completely reasonable that at $150 I might be interested in one of these boxes, but at $450 I am not.

Quote:

*In the end, if you take it back you are no worse off than you were before you had the (mistakenly priced) Replay.*
Actually, there are actual damages that some will incur, including the cost of their time and gas getting to and from their retailer and for some embarrassment at having given a gift that will not actually work as given.


While I agree that for many these damages are small, I think that DNNA is making a serious mistake by not honoring those terms listed on their boxes.

Quote:

*If you don't want it, take it back. Stop crying about something so insignificant.*
That is what many will do, but this will just create a different problem for DNNA to overcome with their retail partners - a perception that this product is faulty (based on customers seeing many open boxes sitting there).


/carmi


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by jones07_
*I wondered how long it would take "Doom an Gloom" majortom to show up again. *
I think that eight pages into this thread my comments seem quite reasonable. Since you do not, how about providing a positive spin on what has happened?


/carmi


----------



## bsoplinger

Intersting, just called the 800 activation number, got the Indian accented line with a prerecorded message telling me that "all our units need to be service activated." Did this message exist before? I've only been calling the tech support line because I had trouble setting up my unit with multiple inputs.


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by melduforx_
*This whole thread is freaking amazing. There are a bunch of people who are arguing that yes, Replay should honor the $150 price including activation. Those same people probably know well enough (even at the time of purchase) that this was a mistake.*



LOL... of course! Why _should_ someone expect to get something from a company when its promised to them in writing? Why _should_ someone expect to spend $150 for something other than a doorstop?

Quote:

*I find it amazing that people aren't willing to pay a fair price for a product.*



Ahh... the old "fair price" argument. 


So people should have done research before buying these and found out the "fair price", right? There's no way people would think that maybe Circuit City (or whomever) was offering a clearance on old stock, or a holiday sale, right?


Or do you think _all_ sales are bad, since they tend to offer merchandise (GASP) below the MSRP!!

Quote:

*In the end, if you take it back you are no worse off than you were before you had the (mistakenly priced) Replay.


If you don't want it, take it back. Stop crying about something so insignificant.*
The more I read about this, the more I find the morality argument lacking. You're on your soapbox telling people it's completely appropriate for a corporation to go back on their promises and blatantly misrepresent their merchandise to the public. So, it's okay for regular folk to get screwed by DNNA, but not the other way around, right?


I find it amazing that some people are so angered by the fact that some are getting 3-year activations and 5500 units for $150. Maybe they should direct their anger at the retailers and DNNA (i.e. those _responsible_ for the mistake).


----------



## jones07

majortom

All I'm saying is, when things are going good for ReplayTV an RPTV owners your are no where to be found. The second there's some bad news for ReplayTV you are johnny on the spot with the worst case scenarios.

Need I post links to your past "worst case scenarios" which none came even close to coming true ?


----------



## cliff498

I for one did not know that the lower pricing was a mistake. I bought 2 5504 units, one for me and one for a gift. (I already have a 5040) Now, with the hassle of taking them back, the time and effort I've spent trying to get them set-up and working before Christmas, and the hard stance I hear from DNNA, I feel they are the Grinch that stole Christmas. IF they ever sell a HDTV Recorder, I feel this stance will have done lots of goodwill damage.


When do people start notifying their State Attorney Generals, the FCC, BBB, and FTC about this whole mess? Or more importantly when does the "word of mouth" effect happen about not trusting DNNA? (where I tell all my friends / family / coworkers to find another DVR) When do the lawyers get involved? (CAL)


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_

I find it amazing that some people are so angered by the fact that some are getting 3-year activations and 5500 units for $150. Maybe they should direct their anger at the retailers and DNNA (i.e. those _responsible_ for the mistake).
I think that most of the people that are siding with DNNA are either:


(1) Jealous that they didnt get in on this deal or mad that they paid more for the same thing

or

(2) Worried that DNNA's screwup may affect the future of this product/subsidary which they have already sunk money into (e.g. existing Replay owners)


In other words, they have their own agenda just like the FWers do - there are very few impartial people on either of these two boards.


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by majortom_
*Many boxes get sold (based on what might have been available at retail) let us guess between a low of 2,000 and a high of 10,000 (very, very, high). If 5,000 were sold, this is a $1.5 million mistake (using lifetime service prices).*
An important thing to keep in mind is that, had the price confusion not occured, RTV would _not_ have sold anywhere near this many units. A RadioShack employee told someone that they hadn't sold any units in MONTHS, and then all a sudden they were sold out.


And had these units not been sold, DNNA would still have taken a loss. The units would have been backstocked until they were obsolete. At least now they are in homes and they might bring a lot more people to RTV now and in the future. For all we know, this could have been the best thing for Replay (_if_ they do the right thing and let people keep their activations). If not, they're looking at 1000s of open boxes and pissed off customers. IMO, they really need to make lemonade out of these lemons...


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by jones07_
*majortom

All I'm saying is, when things are going good for ReplayTV an RPTV owners your are no where to be found. The second there's some bad news for ReplayTV you are johnny on the spot with the worst case scenarios.

Need I post links to your past "worst case scenarios" which none came even close to coming true ?*
I have posted in here on a fairly regular basis (try searching). Let us see if ReplayTv makes it through a full year under its current set of owners before you claim complete vindication. Given what Indrg said, there is not much left of this company and with this latest round missteps we will have to see what D&M does next.


/carmi


----------



## lizard_boy

Quote:

_Originally posted by jones07_
*I wondered how long it would take "Doom an Gloom" majortom to show up again. *
Exactly what I though when I saw its name. "Here come the cockroaches" was the exact phrase that came to mind. Dr(very)Strange shouldn't be far behind.


EDIT - MajorTom claims to be male. I've adjusted my sentence accordingly.


----------



## icecow

Quote:

_Originally posted by jones07_
*Indeed. the past 4 days have shown that DNNA can give and take away at the speed of a Download*
IQ test:

Jones07 has:

A>a dial-up connection

B>broadband


----------



## icecow

Here's an article telling us what we already know, but there's no reason not to share it.


I didn't see it posted in any of these threads, forgive me if it has.

http://www.twice.com/index.asp?layou...y=breakingNews 


cow


----------



## melduforx

Quote:

_Originally posted by winter_
*I think that most of the people that are siding with DNNA are either:


(1) Jealous that they didnt get in on this deal or mad that they paid more for the same thing

or

(2) Worried that DNNA's screwup may affect the future of this product/subsidary which they have already sunk money into (e.g. existing Replay owners)


In other words, they have their own agenda just like the FWers do - there are very few impartial people on either of these two boards.*
Sorry. I don't fall into either one of those categories. While I do own three Replays, I think the products stand for themselves. They work right now; it's a piece of AV gear. In two years they'll be horribly outdated. Such is life. I don't plan on tattooing the Replay logo to my head. When something else better comes along, I'll buy it.


I'm sure, two years from now, people will be moaning over the fact that their two year old Replay doesn't work with whatever newfangled piece of AV gear is out there. They are the same people that are crying now that the $150 pricing error didn't go in their favor. I'm sure that if the $150 pricing error WERE in your favor, we wouldn't hear from you. Right?


So this is where my soapbox comes into play. Yes, it sucks that some people were confused (and rightfully so) by the mistake. And it was a rather large mistake. Should DNNA do something to make it right? Possibly. Do they have to? No.


Let me just ask, had the pricing error gone in your favor, how many of you would have been slinking away with a Replay and been proud of how cheaply you'd gotten it?

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*I find it amazing that some people are so angered by the fact that some are getting 3-year activations and 5500 units for $150. Maybe they should direct their anger at the retailers and DNNA (i.e. those responsible for the mistake).*
Why would you think I'm angered by others getting Replays at an insanely low price? I could say it honestly doesn't bother me, but I'm sure you wouldn't believe me. I don't even have another TV to attach to a Replay. (And I'd much rather spend that $150 on a new cell phone, thank you very much.)


Look, as great as I think it is that people were buying PVRs, most of us in this forum are smart enough to know that the price was a mistake. When it turned out that the mistake didn't go in your favor, you were outraged. The people who most deserve to be upset are those who have never bought a PVR before and don't know/understand what the subscription does. Guess what, those people aren't anywhere near this forum.


While DNNA could benefit by being nice and resolving this issue somehow (which I won't even speculate about...) people who should have known better (i.e. everyone who reads this forum) really ought to grow up and take just a fraction of the responsibility that they think DNNA should be taking.


End soapbox.


Commence flaming.


----------



## melduforx

Quote:

So, it's okay for regular folk to get screwed by DNNA, but not the other way around, right?
I'm a democrat who hasn't had more than one week off of work since I was 14, and yet...


If it's not OK for a corporation to screw "regular folk", why is it OK for "regular folk" to screw a corporation?


Neither way is good, don't you see? Both are wrong.


In the end, take it back if you don't like it. If I get another TV, I'll be there to buy it at $450 (including activation).


----------



## vivarey

Actually, from what I hear most people who bought a RTV during the price confusion are still activated. The rest are finding success by calling in and explaining their situation. As long as they PURCHASED the unit before today's official price change, they are fine. Note I say purchased, and not activated.


You say DNNA does not have to honor their promise of 3-years of activation. Perhaps you're not too familiar with the business laws in this country, but false advertising falls under deceptive business practices, and it _is_ a crime.


----------



## kepy

I was at a CompUSA on Monday 12/22 and there were 6(six) 5508 at $299 all WITH green stickers indicating they had already been activated. Clearly there is STILL poor communication going on here. Signage was still in the store that also said subscription was included.


There was no sign of $149 5504 in the store. I saw nothing on the shelves indicating they even/ever had them.


This would be a candidate for the 'sticker brigade' we heard about awhile ago.


Here's hoping this all works out in the end.


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by melduforx_
*If it's not OK for a corporation to screw "regular folk", why is it OK for "regular folk" to screw a corporation?


Neither way is good, don't you see? Both are wrong.*
Thanks for the lesson in morality. Now can you get off your soapbox and come back down to the _real world_ where things aren't so black-and-white.


I could care less if you're a democrat or green party - if you explain the situation to any OBJECTIVE, rational person - they will immediately tell you the consumer is right on this. Plastering the inside and outside of the box with claims of free service... then not owning up to it? Come on now. Use your common sense, and forget for a minute that these people got better deals than you.


Whether it was the fault of DNNA or the retailers, the consumers win. Hands down.


----------



## melduforx

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*Perhaps you're not too familiar with the business laws in this country, but false advertising falls under deceptive business practices, and it is a crime.*
Wow. A price mistake happens with the _possibility_ of people having to either


a) return the units

or

b) pay the activation fee


...and you'd think DNNA were snatching their first-born child.


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by kepy_
*I was at a CompUSA on Monday 12/22 and there were 6(six) 5508 at $299 all WITH green stickers indicating they had already been activated. Clearly there is STILL poor communication going on here. Signage was still in the store that also said subscription was included.


There was no sign of $149 5504 in the store. I saw nothing on the shelves indicating they even/ever had them.


This would be a candidate for the 'sticker brigade' we heard about awhile ago.


Here's hoping this all works out in the end.*
This is the kind of incompetence that makes me want to stick up for the consumers. Almost a full week after the price confusion began, and the problem is still out there. Now, can you imagine all the people that are still buying these units? Granted, they have less of a case than pre-12/22 buyers, but still a strong case indeed.


DNNA... it's time to pull these boxes! If you don't, any logical person must assume you WANT to sell these cheap and include free service. All it would take is a memo to retailers -- "Please pull all 55XX models from your shelves until futher notice." What are they waiting for? The sticker brigade better get going!


----------



## djMaxM

From a legal perspective, this is different than a simple pricing mistake. We had a similar issue here in Massachusetts where Target advertised a flat screen for like $2000 that really should have been $5000. They cancelled the orders BEFORE shipping and BEFORE charging cards.


This is different. I bought a product from an authorized reseller of ReplayTV's. That product was shipped to me and billed. The product I received is CLEARLY marked as including 3 years of service, and now Replay claims it doesn't. The Massachusetts code on this is EXTREMELY clear. The sticker on the box is advertising. (any label or tag affixed to the product is the exact wording). It is illegal for any company to present false advertising, and the penalties vary, and are up to the Attorney General to go after, but this is a pretty clear case. Problem is it's unclear whether they will go after the retailer or Replay. The retailer would likely go sue Replay, but the retailers are probably more clearly at fault.


Regardless, Replay and SonicBlue will never get one bit of my business and I hope I can short their stock tomorrow. In addition to this theivery, the unit I got is DOA! Drive completely hosed. In this case, lucky them.


I hope they go under in flames, they deserve it. Long live TiVo!


----------



## telamon

Did the CompUSA shelf tag say $299 on the 5508s and list the 3 years service included?


If so someone at CompUSA better get flogged.


I wonder how many of the Replay employees that came up with this transition plan are going to have a job come 1/1/04. Their grace period will be up!


----------



## melduforx

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*Use your common sense, and forget for a minute that these people got better deals than you.*
That's not a valid argument. I really, honestly, truly don't care about the price. It's not about the "better deal". I paid what I paid and it's done with. I'd pay it AGAIN! If it went up in smoke, I'd pay full price for another one.


Please, use YOUR common sense, and end that irrational argument.


----------



## jay_k

Quote:

_Originally posted by djMaxM_
*From a legal perspective, this is different than a simple pricing mistake. We had a similar issue here in Massachusetts where Target advertised a flat screen for like $2000 that really should have been $5000. They cancelled the orders BEFORE shipping and BEFORE charging cards.


This is different. I bought a product from an authorized reseller of ReplayTV's. That product was shipped to me and billed. The product I received is CLEARLY marked as including 3 years of service, and now Replay claims it doesn't. The Massachusetts code on this is EXTREMELY clear. The sticker on the box is advertising. (any label or tag affixed to the product is the exact wording). It is illegal for any company to present false advertising, and the penalties vary, and are up to the Attorney General to go after, but this is a pretty clear case. Problem is it's unclear whether they will go after the retailer or Replay. The retailer would likely go sue Replay, but the retailers are probably more clearly at fault.


Regardless, Replay and SonicBlue will never get one bit of my business and I hope I can short their stock tomorrow. In addition to this theivery, the unit I got is DOA! Drive completely hosed. In this case, lucky them.


I hope they go under in flames, they deserve it. Long live TiVo!*
I won't respond to the flamebait in the post above, but did you at least try to contact customer service? I'm sure they would have sent you a new unit right away, if your unit really was DOA.


And sorry, you can't short their stock...D&M Holdings is private. 


Enjoy your TiVo!


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by melduforx_
*Wow. A price mistake happens with the possibility of people having to either


a) return the units

or

b) pay the activation fee


...and you'd think DNNA were snatching their first-born child.*
I think everyone here is guilty of turning this situation into a bigger issue than it actually is (and possibly, than even DNNA thinks it is).


So you really feel that DNNA does not have to live up to their promises? Do you expect the products you buy to live up to the specs advertised? How is this different? Sorry, but I just don't see a valid (or legal) argument in your posts at all. You talk about morality, yet you fail to see a problem with false advertising.


If those units do start de-activating, I wouldn't be surprised if people disputed the charge with their credit companies. Then the retailers would really lose out, and DNNA would be in a heap of trouble.


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by jay_k_
*And sorry, you can't short their stock...D&M Holdings is private. *
LOL - I'm sure a lot of people have looked that up over the past few days...


----------



## djMaxM

Absolutely called support. Talked to them 3 times, even to an American! (level 2). They would NOT send me a new unit. The retailer is out of stock and will not give me a new one, and Replay says all theirs will not have the sticker, thus STILL not giving me what I purchased.


I understand the nuance of the problem they created, in that they are the ones who eat it if they can't sell service and the retailers blew it, but it is clearly their problem since they manage the retail chain. There are only a handful of people who can claim to have been through this like I have... I was involved in a startup that sold a certain brand of computers that were sold to us as having a "video card". We resold them under the same spec, but turns out they didn't have a card, it was integrated. Who was forced to eat that by a COURT? Well, let's just say it definitely wasn't the customer.


----------



## djMaxM

Oh, and to the person who said dispute with the CC company, I think that very well might be the best way to win... Question is do you dispute the box charge, or activate the service and then dispute that!


----------



## telamon

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*

If those units do start de-activating, I wouldn't be surprised if people disputed the charge with their credit companies. Then the retailers would really lose out, and DNNA would be in a heap of trouble.*
The credit card companies are going to tell you to return it. I can't see the retailers not accepting the return under the circumstances.


----------



## jay_k

Quote:

_Originally posted by telamon_
*The credit card companies are going to tell you to return it. I can't see the retailers not accepting the return under the circumstances.*
I agree, you won't win any dispute if you can still return the item. People tend to overuse credit card disputes...they are really for when you paid for something and never received it at all, and the seller refuses to give you your money back. This is definitely not that situation.


----------



## puppyfriend

Replay has no one to blame for this than themselves. They've handled the situation like idiots. What the should have done was just rev the model number and released new units. Sell the new units at $149 and keep the old stock at $499. Did they put any thought into this or did they just decided to lower the price on a whim one afternoon?


----------



## tluxon

Quote:

_Originally posted by puppyfriend_
*Replay has no one to blame for this than themselves. They've handled the situation like idiots. What the should have done was just rev the model number and released new units. Sell the new units at $149 and keep the old stock at $499. Did they put any thought into this or did they just decided to lower the price on a whim one afternoon?*
I'm sure they just wanted to move the units that had been sitting on shelves and in distribution centers the last several months. IMO, they should've just offered huge rebates and left the pricing structure alone - at least till the end of the year. It's amazing how messy this knee-jerk got.


Tim


----------



## vivarey

Quote:

_Originally posted by jay_k_
*I agree, you won't win any dispute if you can still return the item. People tend to overuse credit card disputes...they are really for when you paid for something and never received it at all, and the seller refuses to give you your money back. This is definitely not that situation.*
By that, I meant if the units de-activate after the return deadline. That would definitely qualify under the Fair Credit Billing Act mandated by the FCC. About the types of disputes covered, it says the FCBA settlement procedures apply only to disputes about "billing errors." For example, _charges for goods and services you didn't accept or weren't delivered as agreed*._ If anyone with a free activation sticker on their box doesn't receive the activation, DNNA broke their agreement and failed to deliver the goods.


*From: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/credit/fcb.htm


----------



## jay_k

Quote:

_Originally posted by vivarey_
*By that, I meant if the units de-activate after the return deadline. That would definitely qualify under the Fair Credit Billing Act mandated by the FCC. About the types of disputes covered, it says the FCBA settlement procedures apply only to disputes about "billing errors." For example, charges for goods and services you didn't accept or weren't delivered as agreed*. If anyone with a free activation sticker on their box doesn't receive the activation, DNNA broke their agreement and failed to deliver the goods.


*From: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/credit/fcb.htm *
That's true, but if this were to happen, I'm sure Replay would make arrangements with retailers to accept returns even after the deadline. Someone at the company must be aware of the FCBA.


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by icecow_
*Here's an article telling us what we already know, but there's no reason not to share it.


I didn't see it posted in any of these threads, forgive me if it has.

http://www.twice.com/index.asp?layou...y=breakingNews 


cow*
Holy crap cow!!! That press release is in the 2nd post in this thread!!!

*You didn't see it because you didn't LOOK*


Sorry, it's post #9
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...18#post3092718 


And I might as well include this:
http://www.digitalnetworksna.com/com...ess.asp?ID=598


----------



## rayw69

I hate it when people on "my side" of the argument make stupid points, thereby convincing people on the "other side" they are right.


----------



## tluxon

I hate it when *I* make stupid points on the right side of the argument, aiding the argument on the wrong side .


----------



## JasonSo

Many people here seem fixated on "false advertising" and "broken promises" brought on by the green sticker. But if that sticker is mistakenly on the box, what is DNNA's or the retailers liability? Put another way, if my store accidentally marks the price of a $15,000 plasma TV as $1,500 and my idiotic sales staff sells them at that price, am I not allowed to go to those customers and demand they pay the $13,500 price difference or return the TV?


----------



## IAmStingRay

true, but not only is there a green sticker, but there is a note inside the box that says thank you for purchasing a unit with a three year subscription... unless you claim that was a mistake too?


----------



## Charms

Quote:

_Originally posted by JasonSo_
*Put another way, if my store accidentally marks the price of a $15,000 plasma TV as $1,500 and my idiotic sales staff sells them at that price, am I not allowed to go to those customers and demand they pay the $13,500 price difference or return the TV?*
Absolutely not! What, you're going to come to my house and make me give back something you sold to me? Are you nuts?


How do you think you'd do this? You'd call the cops and tell them to bust down my door? Or tell them to make me give the TV back to you?


----------



## icecow

Quote:

_Originally posted by Jeff D_
*Holy crap cow!!! That press release is in the 2nd post in this thread!!!


You didn't see it because you didn't LOOK


Sorry, it's post #9
http://.......asp?ID=598 *
I don't know what your problem is but it's close to not being mine.


cow


----------



## cyrnos

Quote:

*The good news is: For those people who have purchased 5500 units or 5040 units from Radio Shack that included 3 years of service, you will now have your service activations converted to "lifetime"! No more of that 99 cents/month add-on to worry about.
*
My RS unit was already activated with 3 years when i called on the 17 (and is still as of now). Does this means i got upgraded to lifetime  or am i out of luck on this one and should expect to get de-activated anytime soon?


Can't believe RTV would do some like that! Even Dell didn't back out of their mistake on the 200 GB and they were no potential there for them to get more sale or subscription out of it....


IMO, if RTV doesn't know how to 'capitalize' on their mistake, they should learn from Dell or they'll feel the pain from the bad word of mouth they'll get...


----------



## Charms

Quote:

_Originally posted by cyrnos_
*IMO, if RTV doesn't know how to 'capitalize' on their mistake, they should learn from Dell or they'll feel the pain from the bad word of mouth they'll get...*
If it's true that Circuit City employees were told to offer price cuts on Tivos to people who were returning Replays then at least we know that SOMEBODY has the understanding of how to capitalize on this mess.


----------



## KenC29

Well, I've never owned a TIVO or ReplayTV before, and have never paid any attention to their pricing structure. I do own an EyeTV DVR for my Mac, which cost m $180, which I'm happy with.


So, when I was at RS looking for Xmas gifts for my brother and sister the other day, I saw these ReplayTV's being advertised. The price was the typical RS half-red tag, that showed the Retail Price $499, then a line below it that said SAVE $350, and then a line below that with the final price of $149. As is typical, the SAVE $350 line caught my eye.


Now, when I saw the price, I didn't think that anyone, the retailer or the mfr was getting screwed. I figured that the model was being phased out, because the harddrive size was/seemed small, and harddrive prices for a 40Gig drive have been dropping like a rock. Second, I figured this was one of those Xmas special prices that were intended to drive foot traffic. I bought a Pioneer DVD burner from OfficeMax last year for $170, when the best internet price at the time was $250. So, you do see "special" prices from time2time.


Now, there was a placard that stated 3-yr activation included. I asked the salesman about it, and he affirmed that activation was included. It was clear from the the price tag that these items were priced to SAVE $350, compared to the Retail price. Clearly, you can only SAVE $350 if activation is included. In my opinion, RS, is the one who messed up, if anyone messed up. They clearly misled customers in their advertising and in their verbal representations. I'm just wondering if it was intentional. Think about it, how many people are going to return these items, or just eat the activation cost? I sent these as gifts across the country to my bro and sis, which cost me $60! I'm telling them to return them to the nearest Radio Shack and to get a refund and to spend their money elsewhere, so as to NOT REWARD RS for screwing up.


I've already lost $60 in this stupid transaction due to RS's incompetence, and don't planto lose any more.


As for the moderator's queries as to why some people would expect to pay less than the real price, the question is why do you think $300 for activation is the "real price"? As far as I was concerned, I have an EyeTV DVR that records to my external harddrive, which I can then edit and archive easily to DVD or VCD. I paid $180, including an easy-to-use programming service, TitanTV. I have no idea what ReplayTV's programming guide does for me that would indicate that it's worth $300. And, the fixed cost for developing the programming guide must surely be amortized by now, while the operational cost of bandwidth, etc, can't be $13 a month, so what is the "real cost"? Are you going to tell me that RS and other retailers pay ReplayTV, $300, when they sell a full-price unit for the subscription on top of the cost of the hardware? I'm sure RS and other retailers pay a fraction of the $300 subscription cost, so what's the "real price"? Isn't RS able to set their own prices? If they want to sell a loss-leader to generate foot traffic, isn't that up to them? How am I to know what lurks in their evil minds? I am happy to return the units, but I've already mailed them, and am annoyed that now I'll have to tell my siblings to return the things. They'll want to know why, and I'll have to explain this nonsense to them on Xmas. All this aggravation besides being out $60 for shipping.


I'm sure some people will eat the activation cost, and so, I'm just wondering if this wasn't just some ploy all along. My RS told me I bought the only two units they EVER had, so firesaling them didn't seem totally unreasonable to me. So, you shouldn't indict angry buyers, for the clear screwup by the retailer, who may not have been so innocent after all.


----------



## Sarcmantis

I really don't see the confusion with all of this.


The sign in the store said this price.


The box (inside and out) said 3 years activation included.


Sounds good to me, sold !



Hmm, it dosen't (or maybe won't work as advertised). That is a clear cut case of FALSE ADVERTISING which is ILLEGAL in the United States. A price typo can only exist in sale papers and flyers outside the store, that is why there are disclaimers in said ads saying not responsible for typo's.


I could care less who is at fault regarding the retailer or the manufacturer, they can sort it out. I gave the retailer my money, so I go after them first.


I could return it, but then who knows when I will be FALSELY ADVERTISED to again to buy another product.


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by JasonSo_
*Many people here seem fixated on "false advertising" and "broken promises" brought on by the green sticker. But if that sticker is mistakenly on the box, what is DNNA's or the retailers liability? Put another way, if my store accidentally marks the price of a $15,000 plasma TV as $1,500 and my idiotic sales staff sells them at that price, am I not allowed to go to those customers and demand they pay the $13,500 price difference or return the TV?*
First, to answer your question - no you can't go demand they pay $13,500 after the sale is completed. If a store sells something at the wrong price and you can't prove the consumer knew it was the wrong price and the transaction is complete (money has changed hands) then the store is stuck. Some will correctly argue that most FWers knew that this was a mistake, unfortunately there is no way for RTV to figure out which customers knew it was a mistake and which didn't - therein lies their problem. Apparently they have decided to treat all customers as if they knew - that isn't going to fly.


Since you brought up the green sticker issue, I think these points bear repeating again:


(1) The sticker was not mistakenly on the box.


(2) This was not a price mistake


(3) There was confirmation for all sides that these units were being sold for $150 with 3-year service. Read that again. Replay CSR's said it was true. The retailers said it was true. The web sites said it (both Replay's and the retailers). NO ONE was saying anything contrary.


Its not like we are grasping at the little green sticker on the box while everyone else was telling us a different story - EVERYONE WAS TELLING US THE SAME STORY and that story was that this unit was for sale at $150 with 3-years of service.


I am amazed that consumers were somehow suppose to figure out that this was a mistake and not just a heavily-discounted sale item at Christmas time which is very common.


----------



## Jodeus

I've read all the posts in this thread and others. So my post won't add anything to the argument.


But I will say that I don't understand the logic behind those that say "even though the price said $XXX you should have realized you really should have been paying $YYY".


WHY?


I admit I stopped at two CC's the night this hit and didn't find one unit. I did check out the demos and also the price sheet. Both the 40 hour model and 80 hour model details clearly (in SMALL print) stated that activation was required.


I also stopped at a CompUSA two days later and found a 40 hour model and 80 hour model. After speaking with the salesperson and noting that they still had the old pricing of $499/$599, I was told that the prices had been reduced and still included activation.


That tells me that DNNA's memo about the change reached the retail outfits but that CompUSA didn't read the entire message to get it out to their sales team that the units now required activation.


Originally in a poll on this board I voted that I put the blame in DNNA. While I don't waver on this, more and more I am looking towards the retailers as the problem. God only knows why DNNA waited until December to make the change, even if they meant the change to go into effect AFTER Christmas, how stupid would that have been? But they have the ability to change their product, it is up to the retailers to get the changes implemented correctly. Which they obviously didn't.


The consumers who bought the product under misleading terms should not be hurt by this, let the retailers make good with DNNA.


Of course then they'll drop the line but what can you do?


One more point I wanted to make. The "Doom & Gloom" posts have already started. Now that ReplayTV is owned by DNNA, a subsidiary of D&M Holdings, a company that has been around for a LONG time, or at least their brand names have. I can not see them stopping the RTV line cold and giving us all doorstops. This company's brand reputation is great, and I really don't think they would piss off 75,000 customers like SonicBlue would have.


My $.02 not even worth that much.


-Jody


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by Jodeus_
*That tells me that DNNA's memo about the change reached the retail outfits but that CompUSA didn't read the entire message to get it out to their sales team that the units now required activation.*
With all the people on this board and FW I can't believe that no one has gotten their hands on the actual memo DNNA sent to its retailers about the price drop and scanned it in. I want to know what is said, specifically when was the price change suppose to take affect and what changes retailers were suppose to make to signs & stickers. As others have said, it seems strange that so many different stores (online and retail) all dropped their price at the same day (12/17) unless DNNA told them too...


Anyone? Bueller?


----------



## icecow

December 9, 2003

Dear Circuit City,

We have dropped the price to $110 a unit. They are to be sold at $149.99 We are delivering 100 units to each one of your stores. Starting December 23 activation will be $299.99 for lifetime service, or $12.95 a month.


Love,

DNNA


----------



## colade

My friend bought an 80 hour replay yesterday at CompUSA with the green sticker. He hooked it up and all seemed well, then he got an activation message. He called Replay and after telling them that he paid 599 for it, the rep said 'oh, good, because we're going to deactivate all the ones bought for 299'


I guess they expect to get all these serial numbers. I bought one yesterday, Sunday, and all seems fine, but my confidence is shot.


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by Jodeus_
*Now that ReplayTV is owned by DNNA, a subsidiary of D&M Holdings, a company that has been around for a LONG time, or at least their brand names have. I can not see them stopping the RTV line cold and giving us all doorstops. This company's brand reputation is great, and I really don't think they would piss off 75,000 customers like SonicBlue would have.


My $.02 not even worth that much.


-Jody*
At this point, I would be very surprised if D&M ceased providing *service* to ReplayTv boxes. Had they done it right away, that would have been one thing, but once they chose to offer it, they are unlikely to stop now. That does not mean that they will keep supporting this product in any other way.


Based on what we have heard they have eliminated most everyone that was employed by ReplayTv and moved many of those who remain to Indiana to work on Escient. While this may mean they still care about this product space, it is also likely that they have given up on this brand name. Only time will tell.


/carmi


----------



## Diode1

The attached gif file ?

I don't see any file, although I am still on my first pot of coffee and could have looked past it.

-Jerry


----------



## jay_k

Quote:

_Originally posted by majortom_
*While this may mean they still care about this product space, it is also likely that they have given up on this brand name. Only time will tell.
*
This might not be a bad thing, especially if Replay leaves a bad first impression with recipients of gifted 55xx units that end up deactivated.


It's not like Replay was a househould name either...I know I always have to say "it's like a TiVo". Maybe we're all better off with the next Replay being branded an Escient.


ReplayTV...the Firestone of PVRs.


----------



## jleavens

Just re-stating a couple of points late here in the thread:


Stickers: Yes, it is true that the green stickers stating activation was included were put on the boxes *purposefully* by Replay. However, it is also true that, as a condition for changing the retail price to the lower prices, the retailers were supposed to either remove those stickers or sticker over them, and note clearly that activation was not included. The retailers happily complied with the price change, but in some cases (not all) did not follow through with the packaging or other changes required. Obviously no one could have changed the info inside the box, but the customers were to be clearly notified that activation was not included.


I believe that there is plenty of precedence for selling items at terms contrary to the packaging. For instance, I have seen stores that sell food items in packaging that promise "free CDs" or "toy inside", but it is all being sold at a discount because the boxes don't have these items, the manufacturer had more packaging than free toys. Clearly, packaging is not the only determining factor. While DNNA clearly deserves some blame for not managing this transition properly, the stores also clearly mis-represented what they were selling.


I've never said that it's the fault of the customer at all. What I've said was that a large portion of the indignant knew quite well that they were trying to get something for nothing. That leaves plenty of room for the people who were legitimately confused.


And as for people who classified the dropping of the interoperability promise as an earlier "screwup", you clearly don't know the facts. Sorry, it's a sore spot for me when the messenger gets shot, especially the lengths Replay went through to try and find real solutions for users. Replay will always be the goat for some people.


----------



## tluxon

Quote:

_Originally posted by winter_
*...

(3) There was confirmation for all sides that these units were being sold for $150 with 3-year service. Read that again. Replay CSR's said it was true. The retailers said it was true. The web sites said it (both Replay's and the retailers). NO ONE was saying anything contrary...*
NOT TRUE. I checked Replay's website at least 10 times a day starting on the 17th, and they continued to list their units at $449, NOT $149 as you imply. This would be CONSISTENT with the statement that 3 years of service was included. It looks like you've put together "sound bytes" on you own to say what you wanted.


Now I don't know what a CSR told you or anyone else, but I'm quite sure they would have been coming from the position that the price change had not officially occurred yet.


I'm on your side if you got a box that had 3 year service stickers all over it - so don't screw that up - but it's starting to look like you're grappling for some other way of justifying you should get 3 years of service. Don't misquote people if you want their cooperation.


----------



## tluxon

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*...And as for people who classified the dropping of the interoperability promise as an earlier "screwup", you clearly don't know the facts. Sorry, it's a sore spot for me when the messenger gets shot, especially the lengths Replay went through to try and find real solutions for users. Replay will always be the goat for some people.*
You're right. The interop "screwup" belonged squarely on the shoulders of SonicBlue. DNNA was very generous in how they handled that situation, but it wasn't without its difficulties either.


Tim


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

And as for people who classified the dropping of the interoperability promise as an earlier "screwup", you clearly don't know the facts. Sorry, it's a sore spot for me when the messenger gets shot, especially the lengths Replay went through to try and find real solutions for users. Replay will always be the goat for some people
What are the facts you reference? My understanding is that RTV hoped and promised (see Quick Setup poster and website referenced) that interropability would be available, but then determined that it was not feasible/possible/desirable/cost-effective to have the 4k's and 5k's talk to one another. While probably not rising to the level of a "screwup," I'd certainly put it in the "boo-boo" category.


That being said, I think Replay's response (trade in program) was an excellent and brilliant solution (though its execution was less than desirable).


On the edit: I see Tim's point re: SB vs. DNNA and if that's what jleavens was referring to, I see where he's coming from now...that was a bed that SB made that DNNA had to lie in...I gotcha now...


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by tluxon_
*NOT TRUE. I checked Replay's website at least 10 times a day starting on the 17th, and they continued to list their units at $449, NOT $149 as you imply. This would be CONSISTENT with the statement that 3 years of service was included.*
See, the sad thing is that (maybe for once) the ReplayTV website actually had the right information, it was the other retailers who had it wrong.


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by brian7972_
*What are the facts you reference? My understanding is that RTV hoped and promised (see Quick Setup poster and website referenced) that interropability would be available, but then determined that it was not feasible/possible/desirable/cost-effective to have the 4k's and 5k's talk to one another. While probably not rising to the level of a "screwup," I'd certainly put it in the "boo-boo" category.*
Sorry, I guess I make distinctions between ReplayTV (DNNA) and ReplayTV (Sonicblue) on this one... Not to divert the thread, but I'll put it this way: I'll take the company who is honest with me over the company that just makes promises. Others may not make that distinction, I grant


----------



## LLaurel

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*See, the sad thing is that (maybe for once) the ReplayTV website actually had the right information, it was the other retailers who had it wrong.*


You mean the page that said "All 5500 models include 3-year subscription to the ReplayTV service and can be extended for only $.99 per month."?


----------



## Zwingle

I went to CUSA again yesterday....I bought 2 from them on Sunday...both are working fine....anyway...they still have not taken down any of the 'Free 3 years service' promo material and the boxes on the floor still had green stickers, yet the price was the new lower price. I asked the sales guy (manager of that area) that was bugging me if he was aware that the 3 years was no longer included and that was why they lowered the price. He was stunned, and told me a RTV rep was in last week and never mentioned anything but the lower prices to go into effect on Dec. 17. He said he got no memo stating about the new sub plan or removing any of the material about the free service. So....who did wrong? I still say that RTV was lacking severely in communicating this to the retailers.


BTW: The stickers could have mistakenly been on the box....but what about the material packed in the box that stated the same thing.....it even pointed you to a now nonexistent website to extend your 3 years for the .99 price.....the website _was_ * www.replaytv.com/morereplay * or something like that that now say PAGE NOT FOUND and has links to RTV.com and the RIO homepage.


Also....the RS memo states incorrect pricing info for the new subs....I still say that RTV flubbed the whole process.


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Sorry, I guess I make distinctions between ReplayTV (DNNA) and ReplayTV (Sonicblue) on this one... Not to divert the thread, but I'll put it this way: I'll take the company who is honest with me over the company that just makes promises. Others may not make that distinction, I grant *
Yes, you are exactly right...only after reading tluxon's post did I get your point. I think it's entirely fair to draw distinctions between the promises of one company versus the delivery of another.


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by LLaurel_
*You mean the page that said "All 5500 models include 3-year subscription to the ReplayTV service and can be extended for only $.99 per month."?*
Yep. For $499.


Remember, Replay didn't announce the price changes with service un-bundling until yesterday.


----------



## prophet5590

Quote:

_Originally posted by tluxon_
*NOT TRUE. I checked Replay's website at least 10 times a day starting on the 17th, and they continued to list their units at $449, NOT $149 as you imply. This would be CONSISTENT with the statement that 3 years of service was included. It looks like you've put together "sound bytes" on you own to say what you wanted.*
This isn't having any direct affect on me -- I've never seen a 550x, so I don't know what all the box said, or what the paperwork inside says. But, as I've been following all this, I have been looking at the various web sites, and the page at Replay's website did say "All 5500 models include a 3-year subscription to the ReplayTV service." It doesn't say "All 5500 models sold from here" or "All 5500 models over $400". Unless you have a different definition of "All" than the commonly accepted one, I'd say their site was confirming that the 5500 models had 3 year subscriptions.


----------



## toots

Actually, that doesn't say "All $499 5500 models." It says "All 5500 models." The $150 models would fall into the "All 5500 models" by virtue of being 5500 models.


It's easy to understand how a consumer might be confused as a result.


Unless consumers are expected to implement some psychic abilities to understand the variant definition of "all" that's in use here.


----------



## NearlyGod

If they were un-bundled (as you you put it) until yesterday, how can 5504 units sound last week, not include service regardless of price?


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by NearlyGod_
*If they were un-bundled (as you you put it) until yesterday, how can 5504 units sound last week, not include service regardless of price?*
Because "regardless of price" isn't a phrase used by most people in business.


Hey, some people seem to get the idea that I'm defending Replay on this, and I'm not. I just happen to be assigning more blame to the retailers than others may be inclined to do.


As poorly managed as this was by Replay, I'm just astonished that no one thinks that the stores share any blame on this. Think about it: these were slow moving products, and I think the retailers were happy to move these units off their shelves, regardless of the number of times (as recounted here many times) they were convinced that there was a mistake. I'm sure the salespeople were happy to ring up the sales, confident that as long as the computer said it was OK, then they were covered. And because of the FatWallet thread, I believe that by the time anyone at Replay had a chance to try and take action, all the units were just gone. All it would have taken to stop this madness was one smart person in each store or even store district to say "hmmm, this doesn't sound right" and speak up. Just one. Whatever was done wrong by Replay, I think each person who bought one of these with no mention of a service plan change was done a disservice by the retailers.


----------



## NearlyGod

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Because "regardless of price" isn't a phrase used by most people in business.*
I am "in business", Marketing in fact, and price is only a factor prior to a sale. Once the item has been purchased, price ceases to be an issue. GM isn't going to tell me that I have don't get the same vehicle as someone else because they paid sticker proce and I saved a few thousand dollars with a supplier discount. I bought the same product, only at a different price. If the un-bundling occurred yesterday then last week, all 5504 where the same product (3 yrs activated).


----------



## LLaurel

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*

Remember, Replay didn't announce the price changes with service un-bundling until yesterday.*
But it seems that they are trying to make it retroactive to last week!


----------



## GooberedUp

I think yesterday's RTV memo sealed the fate (in a good way) of those people who bought before the 22nd. If--yes a big if-- people pursue this, then there's an excellent chance that the person will prevail.


I have a feeling that RTV will have to cave to consumers at some point.


----------



## GooberedUp

Example to clarify?


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by RamblinWreck_
*The attached gif file is proof that Radio Shack new about the price increase. Please note the date of 10/27/03 at the very bottom right of the memorandum. Details of how I obtained the memo can be found at:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...66#post3088766 


****

Edit

****


Had a hell of a time with the gif (sorry about that). Try the attached file which contains the appropriate gif.*
Sorry, that is a very old memo. It was printed by someone on 27-Oct-03, but it is from June. It refers to DNNA dropping their proposed price increase from $9.95 to $12.95, not this current change. In its text, it also talks about some other changes that happened in June and will happen in July (read about changes to RSS mail near its beginning).


/carmi


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by GooberedUp_
*Example to clarify?*
Nah, upon reflection it was not nearly as interesting a twist as I thought it might be


----------



## Snarler

Quote:

_Originally posted by brian7972_
*However, I think it's a little overbroad to say that for the most part, people were trying to take unfair advantage of the situation. As great as fatwallet and AVS are for information, I'd still think that a majority of the RTV sales on these units were by bona fide purchasers with no knowledge of the "opportinity."*
Not a chance. Just look at the number of threads on sales boards, where discussions talk about all the details of this stuff, and the number of views of those threads. Then compare that with how many units were probably sold, keeping in mind that for every person in the thread that bought one there's someone that bought 10 to sell on ebay.


I'd guess 95% of the units sold in that timeframe were to people who knew full well the details of what was going on and are trying to abuse the system. I know I'll get flamed for that by people here who say "Not me!" but I don't believe it.


When was the last time you went into a store, saw something that you knew NOTHING about for $150 and bought it? If you know something about RTV, you know about TiVo, and seeing a $300 price difference should raise an eyebrow that makes you wonder why. Finally, I scouted around for one for myself (again, knowing it was probably a mistake that would be corrected) and saw some (online) at nearby CC's. I checked back again a couple of hours later and they were all gone. So anyone who bought one "just because" would have had a few hours MAX to do it in, so the window of opportunity wasn't there for random sales.


--

Daniel


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by NearlyGod_
*I am "in business", Marketing in fact, and price is only a factor prior to a sale. Once the item has been purchased, price ceases to be an issue. GM isn't going to tell me that I have don't get the same vehicle as someone else because they paid sticker proce and I saved a few thousand dollars with a supplier discount. I bought the same product, only at a different price. If the un-bundling occurred yesterday then last week, all 5504 where the same product (3 yrs activated).*
Okay, let's take this example and see if it's any good.


Ford produces a truck in 2003 with an "YM Satellite Radio" inside, and teams with "YM" for a three-month subscription with purchase of the truck, putting a sticker on the radio saying so. Eight months later, "YM" is done with the offer, and stops putting the stickers on.


Now let's say that it's 2004 and Joe's Ford has one of these 2003 trucks new still in stock, and never bothered to remove the sticker, even though they got the memo that the promotion was over. I buy the truck, and find out that I'm not getting my 3 months of service included. Do I have the right to demand service from "YM"? Do I have the right to demand money back from the dealer?


The analogy has problems, obviously, since the truck is still a truck without the radio. But I'm interested in other people's input on this.


I am really stuck on the disconnect here:

Replay: "Drop the price and tell the customers service isn't included"

Retailer: "Yes, the price is $149 and service is included"


Obviously the retailers got part of the message, but aren't being held responsible for the other part, by customers or Replay. I have no idea why that is, except to speculate that the retailers have more power over Replay than Replay over the retailers.


----------



## telamon

I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but I've been thinking about why DNNA didn't do a recall and change all the product packaging or create a new model. Then I got to thinking about the layoff annoucements and about the discontinuing of the line.


Speculation mode ON:


What if NO more Replay TV units as we know them today are ever going to be manufactured? What if all the stock thats in the supply chain right now is all there will ever be? Why take the expense of changing packaging when you're not going to need any more packaging?


Could D&M's exit strategy be to get as many of the ones on store shelves into the hands of consumers now and collect subscription fees until all those units die out while folding the Replay technology into Escient? Being a stand up company, I'd expect D&M to make sure the ones sold remained supported until they died of natural causes.


Speculation mode OFF:


I for one love my Replay TVs. I have an old Panasonic Showstopper that still going strong (post 80GB upgrade). I bought a 4500 series and paid full lifetime subscription for it (which I do NOT regret). I even gave one with lifetime activation to some dear friends as a wedding gift back when I got my 4500.


I feel for Replay and for the consumers who got caught up in this mess. I hope a compromise can be reached. The information surfacing really does make it look like DNNA botched telling the retailers about the service change. But then there are retailers who knew about the service change but didn't take the trouble to block out the stickers and promo material.


As with many things in life, this is NOT a black and white situation. In the end, I think Replay has to use the date of purchase as the overriding factor not the price. I hope they realize that before it's too late.


----------



## Runny

Has anybody tried contacting high-ranking officials at RS, CC, CUSA, or DNNA? Does anybody have a means to? That might be the quickest way to get _some_ kind of resolution on this...


----------



## cwoody222

Quote:

_Originally posted by avhokie_
*From everything I've heard, retailers paid some price for each unit that allowed them to sell the units with activation. DNNA told them to sell at a lower price and not include activation, and that the retailer would be credited for the activation fee. If the retailer decided to sell at the lower price with the activation, then DNNA should not credit the retailers.*
I thought the same thing. Did retailers pay a higher Wholesale cost for unit with bundled service?


If so...Replay already made their money on that service. So...unless they are crediting the retailer back a portion of the Wholesale price the retailer paid (the portion being the value of the service, not the hardware) then DNNA is making money on the service twice.


So instead of punishing the consumer who was told inaccurate facts DNNA should just not credit the retailer.


----------



## nataraj

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Just re-stating a couple of points late here in the thread:


I've never said that it's the fault of the customer at all. What I've said was that a large portion of the indignant knew quite well that they were trying to get something for nothing. That leaves plenty of room for the people who were legitimately confused.

*
As a long time user of AVS and FW, let me point out a few things.


There have been plenty of deals where you get discontinued stuff for less than 1/3rd the price. So when I saw 5040 (which the entertainment industry didn't like and forced RTV to remove a couple of features) selling for $150 (with the price tag in the store saying $450), I was not surprised at all. Nor did I think it was a price mistake. Old stuff gets sold for heavy discounts regularly. The RS salesman told me the price has just dropped but all the units they have are preactivated and I'd get three years of service. But the box said "activation needed". So, I didn't buy, I came back home.


Then I saw the postings in FW which said the boxes in RS always said they needed activating even though they didn't (even when they were selling for $499). So went again and picked up the unit.


For people who picked up the green label units in CC, there is absolutely no reason for anyone to think that the product is not being heavily discounted so as to clear them out. There is no reason to suspect that it was a price mistake.


It is not unusual for manufacturer site to give full MSRP price while retailers heavily discount.


I remember that RTV sold refurb units with life time activation for $249 (or was that ultimate tv ?). I didn't buy then since I didn't think it was worth the price. But at $150 I think it is okay. I'm not getting something for nothing ... I paid $150, which is what I'd like to pay for such a device, especially for one with such a puny harddrive (may be $200, no more). Guide info is public knowledge and available for free over the net.


Obviously RTV prices are overbloated. A 40GB unit is $150 and 80GB is $300 ??!! Whats the difference in price between a 40Gb and a 80GB harddrive ? I don't think for elctronics / pc items anything more than 50% of MSRP is a fair price. So I'm not at all surprised to get this 5040 for $150 with service included. I was surprised when I found out it was a screwup and not an intended discount.


Now, if this is a screwup, this is not the first time a company has done it. Though this is the worst case I've seen. All their retailers give wrong information. The websites give wrong info. Their CSRs give wrong info. The units get activated as if they are preactivated and come with service.


Usually we get a price mistake on a website and we all place orders. The orders get cancelled, a few people crib, but in all no loss to anyone. But to go pick the unit from RS / CC, set it up at home, change home network configs / home theatre setup etc only to be told I've to pay 200% more to use the product is just plain bait & switch.


They have little or no chance at all of anyone paying a dime for service on any of these units now. They either get service (at no real cost to RTV) or they go back to RS / CC and sit gathering dust like they have been doing for the past several months. They will all finally go back to RTV, which will sell them as refurb for a big discount on their website.


How do we know this was indeed NOT a bait & switch ? Corporate ethics now-a-days is so impeccable, it is difficult to assume anything as not possible ...


We all make mistakes in life and have to endure the consequences. Now, it is the turn of RTV / CC / RS.


----------



## telamon

Quote:

_Originally posted by cwoody222_
*I thought the same thing. Did retailers pay a higher Wholesale cost for unit with bundled service?


If so...Replay already made their money on that service. So...unless they are crediting the retailer back a portion of the Wholesale price the retailer paid (the portion being the value of the service, not the hardware) then DNNA is making money on the service twice.


So instead of punishing the consumer who was told inaccurate facts DNNA should just not credit the retailer.*
Retailers did pay a higher wholesale price for the units with bundled activation. From what pu82 said, they were instructed to sell at the lower price and unbundle the activation (remove the 3 year included sticker) while submitting the SNs for ones in inventory so they could be credited for the difference.


Now for someone like pu82 who's not as large as say RS or CC, that wouldn't be so hard to do. However with a distributed organization like CC, RS, CompUSA and the like the communication issues would screw things up. Process changes are difficult for any organization with multiple sites.


----------



## bobo809

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Yep. For $499.


Remember, Replay didn't announce the price changes with service un-bundling until yesterday.*
I called RTV on 12/17 and asked whether the service is included. I told the person that there's a big price drop and pointed him to amazon's website. He looked at it and went to consult the supervisor, came back and said all 550X comes with 3 years service.


I respect what you said, but I found it hard to believe all retailers made the same mistake at the same time. At the very least, RTV did not communicate the change effectively to their retail channels. They did not do enough to make sure this transition go smoothly. And to do this at the busiest time of the year for retailers, they deserve 100% of the blame. Period.


----------



## sheakt

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Now let's say that it's 2004 and Joe's Ford has one of these 2003 trucks new still in stock, and never bothered to remove the sticker, even though they got the memo that the promotion was over. I buy the truck, and find out that I'm not getting my 3 months of service included. Do I have the right to demand service from "YM"? Do I have the right to demand money back from the dealer?

*
Absolutely.... the dealer willfully sold the vehicle to the customer knowing that the customer had the full expectation that the "service" was included for 3 months. Can he demand service from "YM"?... He can try but will most likely be unsucessful as they notified the dealer and the dealer should have made the approprates changes. Can he demand money form the dealer? I believe that he can and should be reimbursed from the dealer for the 3 months of service as the dealer willing sold the vehicle with documentation stating the service was included *KNOWING* that it was not...


----------



## GooberedUp

Quote:

_Originally posted by nataraj_
*As a long time user of AVS and FW, let me point out a few things.


[snip]


We all make mistakes in life and have to endure the consequences. Now, it is the turn of RTV / CC / RS.*
Very nice.


----------



## Diode1

For those that may have missed my comments in the other AVS thread

"A new perspective on the latest Replay F-up",

I shall cut-n-paste them here also.


I really think people overlook/estimate the actual manufacturing cost of this hardware. If anyone in their right mind at this time feels that replay is selling the 5504/5508 so-on at or under actual cost does not have a clue.

Lets forget the idea that a 5508 80GB HD drive really cost $150 over the 5504 40GB drive. DNNA has little to no actual R&D cost into this venture.

Guy's they purchased replay to make a fast $.

It was at a bargain price and they took advantage of this misfortune of others.

Kind of like $149 units on the shelves being sold with service.


A second thought, If DNNA is having financial difficulties with this Replay venture, This fiasco only plays into the hands of LONGTIME users and the new users. Replay has had very minimal market penetration, the service base was minimal at best, They could have just ceased operations & remove all products from the store shelves. With such a small customer base a court would not have been in the favor of the consumer as to forcing continued service for a given time. But now with a huge very resent jump in new costumers, I find it very difficult to see that the consumer would not benefit, NEW & OLD.

Courts look at this to determine the track the companies will take to close up shop.

This fiasco has both good & bad in it, even for those longtime users.


Now why should anyone think DNNA is a victim here in any scenario?


----------



## Bas2000

Quote:

_Originally posted by s.bradford_


But... as of today I have come to the conclusion that the current DNNA management feels very much OK with the fact that whatever they say today has nothing to do with what they will say tomorrow. Quite frankly I am now waiting for the next software download that will disable CA and IVS in 5000 units.
They better not disable CA and IVS! Those are the two main reasons I upgrade my ShowStoppers to the 50XX Series by paying top dollar.


Just a side note, are melduforx and icecow like twins? LOL, I'm just going by their photo.


----------



## divofin

[Post removed. Post it was in reply to was removed]


----------



## rainbow_wahine

Quote:

_Originally posted by Jodeus_
*I've read all the posts in this thread and others. So my post won't add anything to the argument.


But I will say that I don't understand the logic behind those that say "even though the price said $XXX you should have realized you really should have been paying $YYY".


WHY?


I admit I stopped at two CC's the night this hit and didn't find one unit. I did check out the demos and also the price sheet. Both the 40 hour model and 80 hour model details clearly (in SMALL print) stated that activation was required.


I also stopped at a CompUSA two days later and found a 40 hour model and 80 hour model. After speaking with the salesperson and noting that they still had the old pricing of $499/$599, I was told that the prices had been reduced and still included activation.


That tells me that DNNA's memo about the change reached the retail outfits but that CompUSA didn't read the entire message to get it out to their sales team that the units now required activation.


Originally in a poll on this board I voted that I put the blame in DNNA. While I don't waver on this, more and more I am looking towards the retailers as the problem. God only knows why DNNA waited until December to make the change, even if they meant the change to go into effect AFTER Christmas, how stupid would that have been? But they have the ability to change their product, it is up to the retailers to get the changes implemented correctly. Which they obviously didn't.


The consumers who bought the product under misleading terms should not be hurt by this, let the retailers make good with DNNA.


Of course then they'll drop the line but what can you do?


One more point I wanted to make. The "Doom & Gloom" posts have already started. Now that ReplayTV is owned by DNNA, a subsidiary of D&M Holdings, a company that has been around for a LONG time, or at least their brand names have. I can not see them stopping the RTV line cold and giving us all doorstops. This company's brand reputation is great, and I really don't think they would piss off 75,000 customers like SonicBlue would have.


My $.02 not even worth that much.


-Jody*
I blame both....if blame makes a difference. Personally, I think RTV knew they had unsold units out in the field, but didn't want to go to the expense of getting them back to refurbish them. Someone probably got the bright idea to send out a memo telling the retailers to remove the green sticker and internal paperwork and make them think that WE have deactivated them. We all will probably agree that the green sticker doesn't have any magic properties to make the unit have automatic activation and removing them didn't change anything. Change the website to ask for $$. So the customer buys it, hooks it up, sees the please register screen and enters in his appropriate information and goes on with life happy as a clam. I'd guess that I would be pretty close simply because of the volume of ?'s here and at FW asking about the activation screen and people freaking out about having to pay.


So, the retailers, thinking that RTV did the deactivation at their place, jump the gun and mark down the units a week in advance...after all, the price adjustment memo came down from RTV and they would probably be getting the credit from them to offset...so what does it matter if they sell it a week earlier or not?


In normal cases, it doesn't matter. But this one it did. Both hands didn't know what the other was doing...and they really shouldn't . I mean, RTV sents MSRP and cannot dictate to the retailers how to price it (price fixing is illegal). It can "suggest" a sale by offering incentives to sell the unit (either a spiff for the sales person or kickback to the store). But can it say anything if CC decides to sell it for a dollar? Besides, I don't think RTV doesn't track which units sell or sit in a retailer's warehouse...they get the numbers back when new subscribers call back to the mothership. So while they probably know who got what when the units shipped from the mfg to the retailer, they probably didn't care too much to track which units went where once the units were in the distribution channel.


So, if everything would have went as planned, the majority of customers purchasing RTV would have been none the wiser that their units were preactivated and paid. There's that small majority (unless he's a FW member) that would have probably messed with the unit and gotten the free activation, but RTV would have been prepared to eat that one. Unfortunately they never dreamed that this would happen.


I guess it's like loss prevention. LP knows there are people that will try and succeed to rip you off. You put all the procedures, policies and safeguards in place that you can think of. Unfortunately, there are people out there that think outside the box and still manage to rip you off...so you change the policy to put up the deterrant after the fact.


So that's my two cents. It still doesn't say what RTV will do. All I know is it is one big ball of string in a huge knot and the more they pull on the stings the knot gets more tangled. The million dollar question is still out there...what exactly are they going to do?


----------



## tluxon

Quote:

_Originally posted by rainbow_wahine_
*...I mean, RTV sents MSRP and cannot dictate to the retailers how to price it (price fixing is illegal). It can "suggest" a sale by offering incentives to sell the unit (either a spiff for the sales person or kickback to the store). But can it say anything if CC decides to sell it for a dollar?*
Actually, manufacturers have done this for decades. It's quite common for a manufacturer to limit the number and type of resellers that can carry their product so there is control over the price and way the product is presented to the marketplace. Mandating a minimum selling price is a way a manufacturer can "protect" the other nodes of their "sales fleet". I'm not so sure DNNA has done this, but I'm just saying that many do. Certainly Denon does, which D & M Holdings would be more familiar with.


Tim


----------



## divofin

Its very interesting to read this thread and see all of the biases and personal agendas come out, on both sides of the issue. It is obvious that Replay bungled something. To have so many retailers drop the price "early" - on the exact same day - points only to Replay being at fault. Where is the proof that the merchants were properly informed anyway? The only thing I've seen which even suggest retailers knew anything came from pu82, which is a small time reseller of these, and most likely, being a member here, more in touch with DNNA than the average acct rep at a large chain. I'd venture to guess the terms of the agreement DNNA has with the large chains varies wildly from that which they have with him. Applying what he has stated to the actions of a large chain such as CC or Compusa does not make sense.


As of yesterday two local stores I checked still had green stickered units on the shelves, and, another was still willing to sell their last (no box) demo unit, with no mention or idea of what was going on, and signage indicating 3 years was included, albeit with a $499 price point indicated. The green sticker units were larger capacitiy units. Obviously the "hot deals" crowd is not interested in paying $299 (or more for the larger) for the 80 hour unit.


The sad thing is that they are really in a bind now. I can imagine people calling up way into next year trying to get "I bought this last year" units activated.



Sorry to restate the obvious but this has been and continues to be terribly mishandled by DNNA.


----------



## Roto

Quote:

_Originally posted by jay_k_
*This might not be a bad thing, especially if Replay leaves a bad first impression with recipients of gifted 55xx units that end up deactivated.


It's not like Replay was a househould name either...I know I always have to say "it's like a TiVo". Maybe we're all better off with the next Replay being branded an Escient.
*
I wouldn't mind them dropping the Replay name, but Escient? That's a shampoo not a DVR.


----------



## toots

Reading some comments posted about Escient products, I'm not sure that'd be too big a move up. I mean, Escient is well respected for being high-snoot, but everything I've read about their software makes it sound flakey to me.


All of this seems to beg the question as to what D&M were buying when they bought the ReplayTV name. Were they interested in the product line or the patents and other IP?


edit: fixed a verb


----------



## tedler

Quote:

The green sticker units were larger capacitiy units. Obviously the "hot deals" crowd is not interested in paying $299 (or more for the larger) for the 80 hour unit.
Not when you can buy a 200GB drive for $20 on a "dell" screw-up. ;-)

The folks grabbing this from FW know a deal when they see one...the only deal last week was on the 40GB drive...as the 80GB drive is STILL overpriced at $299.


----------



## BaysideBas

They're just waiting for the new Replay OS to be developed, you know, the one that will schedule and record shows before you even decide that you want to watch them. Then they will change the product line's name to PrEscient.


----------



## rad

Why can't DNNA just post on their web site what the heck is going to or not happen with the units involved? It's been 1 week since this mess started, they should know by know what the plan is.


----------



## antnjen

Quote:

_Originally posted by tluxon_
*NOT TRUE. I checked Replay's website at least 10 times a day starting on the 17th, and they continued to list their units at $449, NOT $149 as you imply. This would be CONSISTENT with the statement that 3 years of service was included. It looks like you've put together "sound bytes" on you own to say what you wanted.


Now I don't know what a CSR told you or anyone else, but I'm quite sure they would have been coming from the position that the price change had not officially occurred yet.


I'm on your side if you got a box that had 3 year service stickers all over it - so don't screw that up - but it's starting to look like you're grappling for some other way of justifying you should get 3 years of service. Don't misquote people if you want their cooperation.*
I'm not sure what Winter was told either, but I'll tell you what I read and was told:
CC's web store product information page for the 5504 said $149. It also said it was a $350 savings. If it didn't include 3 years of service, then how could the original price have been $499???
CC's web store product information page specifically said service is "Free".
A CC CSR that I phoned told me that service is "included".
RTV's web site says that 5504s come with 3 years of activation. It doesn't say, "...if you buy it from our web site only", or "only when you pay $499"
As of yesterday (I haven't checked today), RTV's activation phone line has a lengthy greeting that includes a message that ALL 5500 series units are already activated. Again, it doesn't say "unless you paid $149."
When I called to activate my new 5504 on 12/17, the RTV CSR told me it included 3 years of service. I asked about the identical unit I had dropped ship to a relative for Christmas. He said, "Yup. It's included on that one, too."


The bottom line is that this isn't just a typo on a web site or a system malfunction. Those scenarios would be covered by the Rules of Mistake in contract law. Rather, this was a systematic communication ($149 gets you a RTV 5504 with 3 years of service) from RTV AND it's authorized agents (i.e. the retailers).


It's amazing to me that some choose to play the morality and etics cards on this f-up, but when everyone was buying those hard drives a few months back (some had an 8MB cache, some had a 2MB cache - same price - you could only tell the difference by looking at a code on the box) nobody say "boo".


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by Bas2000_
*They better not disable CA and IVS!*
There's no one even asking them to do this.


They always have the right to do that, but they will not. It said so on the box, I think


----------



## j.m.

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*

And because of the FatWallet thread, I believe that by the time anyone at Replay had a chance to try and take action, all the units were just gone. All it would have taken to stop this madness was one smart person in each store or even store district to say "hmmm, this doesn't sound right" and speak up.
*
This incident started last Wednesday. There were very visible threads about it here and at FW. I'm sure ReplayLyndon was aware of one or both of these by Thursday at the latest. You were probably aware at least by then. With your apparent connections at ReplayTV, why didn't YOU speak up sooner? Even after people at ReplayTV presumably became aware of the situation by the end of last week at the latest, did they try to get notice to retailers to not sell any more units? Not AFAIK, and FYI, when the "official" announcement was made Monday, units were still being found in stores.

Quote:

*I am really stuck on the disconnect here:

Replay: "Drop the price and tell the customers service isn't included"

Retailer: "Yes, the price is $149 and service is included"


Obviously the retailers got part of the message, but aren't being held responsible for the other part, by customers or Replay. I have no idea why that is, except to speculate that the retailers have more power over Replay than Replay over the retailers.*
Well, just how is it that EVERY major retailer that carries ReplayTVs made the same mistake on the same day? You have to admit there is something fishy about that.


Now, it has become clear that you think very little blame should go to ReplayTV. Well, think about it this way. It was their product, and it was their decision to change pricing structure again. Given the amazing number of times they have flip-flopped on pricing in such a short time, before making another drastic change affecting existing stock they had the burden of making sure the message and plan was clear. Obviously, they failed.


As another poster pointed out, it appears as if ReplayTV tried to accomplish this change on the cheap. Instead of recalling existing stock for repackaging, they planned on just crossing out/covering the stickers. They apparently were even planning on getting the Demo Days VOLUNTEERS from these forums to do that for them. I mean, come on. Sorry, as much as I like my ReplayTVs, they blew it in a big way on this one and are continuing to do so with their pitiful responses to the situation.


----------



## RamblinWreck

Quote:

_Originally posted by majortom_
*Sorry, that is a very old memo. It was printed by someone on 27-Oct-03, but it is from June. It refers to DNNA dropping their proposed price increase from $9.95 to $12.95, not this current change. In its text, it also talks about some other changes that happened in June and will happen in July (read about changes to RSS mail near its beginning).


/carmi*
Major Tom:


My bad, you are correct. Offending post(s) deleted.


----------



## telamon

Quote:

_Originally posted by BaysideBas_
*They're just waiting for the new Replay OS to be developed, you know, the one that will schedule and record shows before you even decide that you want to watch them. Then they will change the product line's name to PrEscient.*
Too late, already done. Tivo.


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by tluxon_
*NOT TRUE. I checked Replay's website at least 10 times a day starting on the 17th, and they continued to list their units at $449, NOT $149 as you imply. This would be CONSISTENT with the statement that 3 years of service was included. It looks like you've put together "sound bytes" on you own to say what you wanted.


Now I don't know what a CSR told you or anyone else, but I'm quite sure they would have been coming from the position that the price change had not officially occurred yet.


I'm on your side if you got a box that had 3 year service stickers all over it - so don't screw that up - but it's starting to look like you're grappling for some other way of justifying you should get 3 years of service. Don't misquote people if you want their cooperation.*
I appreciate that you are on my side regarding the sticker issue but I don't think I can let that comment slide:


After several people have stated the same thing that I did, specifically:


(1) the RTV web site did not qualify that the "3 years free service" was only included if you purchased it for $500 or only at Replay's site and that a normal interpretation of what they posted would lead a normal person to believe that it included 5504's purchased elsewhere.


and


(2) that RTV CSR's were still telling customers that 3 years service was included even after being told (by the customer) that the 5504 was being priced by retailers and web sites at $150 (and even after consulting a supervisor, according to bobo809's post)


Nothing I stated in the article you replied to was an exaggeration or a misquote and for you to imply that is wrong. I understand its hard to believe that RTV screwed up that badly, but the reality is they did.


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by antnjen_
*I'm not sure what Winter was told either, but I'll tell you what I read and was told:
*
*CC's web store product information page for the 5504 said $149. It also said it was a $350 savings. If it didn't include 3 years of service, then how could the original price have been $499???*
*CC's web store product information page specifically said service is "Free".*
*A CC CSR that I phoned told me that service is "included".*
*RTV's web site says that 5504s come with 3 years of activation. It doesn't say, "...if you buy it from our web site only", or "only when you pay $499"*
*As of yesterday (I haven't checked today), RTV's activation phone line has a lengthy greeting that includes a message that ALL 5500 series units are already activated. Again, it doesn't say "unless you paid $149."*
*When I called to activate my new 5504 on 12/17, the RTV CSR told me it included 3 years of service. I asked about the identical unit I had dropped ship to a relative for Christmas. He said, "Yup. It's included on that one, too."*
*

The bottom line is that this isn't just a typo on a web site or a system malfunction. Those scenarios would be covered by the Rules of Mistake in contract law. Rather, this was a systematic communication ($149 gets you a RTV 5504 with 3 years of service) from RTV AND it's authorized agents (i.e. the retailers).


It's amazing to me that some choose to play the morality and etics cards on this f-up, but when everyone was buying those hard drives a few months back (some had an 8MB cache, some had a 2MB cache - same price - you could only tell the difference by looking at a code on the box) nobody say "boo".*
Thank you antnjen. I don't know how many different people have to post the same facts before the naysayers start to realize that this was, as you put it, a "systematic communication".


In fact the only confusion was caused by forum posters here and at FW who said this deal can't be real because the price is too low. Who in their right mind would listen to random people saying this must be a price mistake when the own company and the retailers were saying the opposite?


There was a single message from those responsible with interacting with consumers (RTV CSRs and the retailers) - these units are now being sold at $150 with 3-years service. Period.


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by j.m._
*Well, just how is it that EVERY major retailer that carries ReplayTVs made the same mistake on the same day? You have to admit there is something fishy about that.*
Yes, but fishy does not automatically make an argument. And considering that there were a number of sales reps and stores who *did* know that there had been a change, it makes you wonder why some were on the ball and some not.

Quote:

*Now, it has become clear that you think very little blame should go to ReplayTV. Well, think about it this way. It was their product, and it was their decision to change pricing structure again. Given the amazing number of times they have flip-flopped on pricing in such a short time, before making another drastic change affecting existing stock they had the burden of making sure the message and plan was clear. Obviously, they failed.*
Yes and no. I think Replay realized that their service bundling and pricing needed to change and that the sooner they did it, the better. After all, the current pricing at $50 less than a 40 hour TiVo (with the same service prices) is a very compelling reason to consider a Replay. I agree that they made a calculated decision between making the change immediately to the current stock or take the time required to re-number a model (more than you think), and their decision has come back to haunt them.


Quote:

*they planned on just crossing out/covering the stickers. They apparently were even planning on getting the Demo Days VOLUNTEERS from these forums to do that for them. I mean, come on.*
Demo Days "volunteers" make $18/hour.


I agree, the lack of clear communication sucks, and I've made that clear to the people I know in the company. Let's see what they have to say...


----------



## sixt7gt350

DNNA really messed this up by changing things when and how they did.

Where DNNA really, REALLY messed things up was allowing CSRs to confirm 3-year subscriptions on units. How can you argue against that?


I wish would have had the presence of mind to have purchased from CC instead of RS and also to have confirmed the 3 year subscription that my unit started out with. I'm now sitting on a grace period 5040 and the CSR just told me that they CAN retroactively change whether or not the service is included. 


Disappointed? Yup.

Indignant? Not that I can feel.

Frustrated? Very.

Confused? Absolutely.

Bitter? Probably, because they've treated customers so vastly different, depending on the timing of the call.


Sour grapes: "Why couldn't _I_ be one of the lucky ones to win the DNNA SNAFU lottery?" (Without stooping to a lie, of course.)


----------



## gweempose

I happen to be one of the people who purchased a unit from Radio Shack. I knew there was a high probability that the deal was too good to be true, but I wanted to get one for a friend as a wedding gift and I figured I had nothing to lose. Needless to say, I will be returning the Replay for a refund in the near future.


I just don't understand why so many people feel that they are entitled to keep the Replay for $150 and still get the service for free. As far as I can see, there were two logical ways for the retailers to deal with this situation:


1) Give the customer what they want (free service).

*OR*


2) Give the customer a full refund.


In my opinion, either of these solutions adequately rectifies the situation from a customer standpoint. Since option two is clearly available to everyone who bought one of these units, why are people still complaining? About the only argument that makes any sense to me is that either the store or DNNA owes us some sort of compensation for our time and aggravation. Perhaps they do, but isn't $300 a bit extreme?


----------



## BaysideBas

Quote:

_Originally posted by telamon_
*Too late, already done. Tivo.*
Wrong, the Tivo schedules and records shows for you that you will never want to watch. The devil is in the details.....


----------



## sixt7gt350

No entitlement here.

"Sour grapes" best describes my condition.

I knew it was a gamble, hence the lottery analogy.


Some have kept their activation without any contact to DNNA.

Some got their activation back after a quick call.


I don't feel envy toward those who lied, only those who have been lucky.


----------



## avhokie

Quote:

_Originally posted by gweempose_
*

2) Give the customer a full refund.


In my opinion, either of these solutions adequately rectifies the situation from a customer standpoint. Since option two is clearly available to everyone who bought one of these units, why are people still complaining? About the only argument that makes any sense to me is that either the store or DNNA owes us some sort of compensation for our time and aggravation. Perhaps they do, but isn't $300 a bit extreme?*
Hi, this is your local car dealership. We've decided that we made a mistake and you paid too little for your car. We actually didn't mean to include the turbo, CD changer, or leather seats, even though the window sticker shows them. And yes, we might have even told you they were included. But we were wrong. So we need you to return your car. We'll refund your purchase price. In the meantime, we've put a boot on your car. Thanks and Merry Christmas!


----------



## edjrwinnt

I've been watching this fiasco since the day it started almost a week ago. I have to say that it seems to me that that Replay is in serious financial trouble based on everything they've done (let this fiasco even happen, the recent layoffs, etc.) or not done (announce if any of the initial $149 Replays will include 3 years of service or not). My biggest concern right now is that I have 4 door stoppers in the waiting (2 Showstoppers and 1 each of the 5504 and 5040's that I paid $149 each for).


All this bickering about who's to blame and what will happened is worthless if the company goes out of business or even shuts down the Replay division which it sounds to me like it may. I just hope they release a final code to make these PVR's function like VCR's so they're not totally useless.


----------



## tluxon

Quote:

_Originally posted by winter_
*I appreciate that you are on my side regarding the sticker issue but I don't think I can let that comment slide:


After several people have stated the same thing that I did, specifically:


(1) the RTV web site did not qualify that the "3 years free service" was only included if you purchased it for $500 or only at Replay's site and that a normal interpretation of what they posted would lead a normal person to believe that it included 5504's purchased elsewhere.


and


(2) that RTV CSR's were still telling customers that 3 years service was included even after being told (by the customer) that the 5504 was being priced by retailers and web sites at $150 (and even after consulting a supervisor, according to bobo809's post)


Nothing I stated in the article you replied to was an exaggeration or a misquote and for you to imply that is wrong. I understand its hard to believe that RTV screwed up that badly, but the reality is they did.*
You're right - a person would have had to be clairvoyant or really been up to speed on the fact that some kind of upcoming change was planned. It would be unfair for me to assume that most people were keeping up with ReplayTV news as much as I do. It's unfortunate that the ReplayTV website did/does not spell out the terms of service along with the list price of the unit on the same page.


There's no question that DNNA really dropped the ball on this one in not reacting immediately and assertively. It was confusing to all of us and there were no definitive sources of DNNA's official position to assuage our confusion. I have to admit that some of my certainty that there was no huge price drop that included service was that there was no advanced notice to current Replay owners, who in the past have been the first to know of any "special deals". This thing hit FW and the other "deal" sites at least as fast as it hit here, which was very strange. That's why I was biased the way I was.


I'm especially discouraged that I haven't seen a single press release by DNNA regarding this fiasco. I can only conclude that they were worried about perception and covering their behinds, which is the wrong thing to do. I would've been able to maintain more respect for them had they been upfront and candid and forthcoming about the whole deal as soon as they were remotely aware of it. Now it looks like someone who's saying they can't tell us anything until they speak to their lawyer. I've defended their position, but there's no defense for their lack of public action.


Cheers,


Tim


----------



## volcs

Quote:

_Originally posted by BaysideBas_
*Wrong, the Tivo schedules and records shows for you that you will never want to watch. The devil is in the details.....*
Hmm...my Tivo doesn't do that. It only records what I tell it to. If you want Tivo to record what it thinks you'll like, you need to have that option turned on.


My impressions after using Replay for a week (and Tivo for 2 years) is that they both do exactly the same thing....quite well, I might add. There are things I like about both of them. I like Tivo's scheduling and interface better, and I like Replay's speed and ability to download and stream shows. Having both around has been fun, but if the Replay needs to go back, I'll be happy with "just" the Tivo.


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by edjrwinnt_
*All this bickering about who's to blame and what will happened is worthless if the company goes out of business or even shuts down the Replay division which it sounds to me like it may.*
At this point even if they close this division and eliminate its brand, they are likely to maintain service for at least a few years. When they first acquired ReplayTv, they would have easily been able to turn-off service, but now it would be quite expensive to do it.


/carmi


----------



## edjrwinnt

How so? Do you mean from a legal liability standpoint?


----------



## antnjen

Quote:

_Originally posted by gweempose_
*...About the only argument that makes any sense to me is that either the store or DNNA owes us some sort of compensation for our time and aggravation. Perhaps they do, but isn't $300 a bit extreme?*
I think having to tell my relatives that the Christmas present sitting under their tree has to be returned unless they are willing to fork over $299 for service is a bit extreme. Therefore, I concur with you: $300 is a bit extreme.


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by edjrwinnt_
*How so? Do you mean from a legal liability standpoint?*
When acquiring assets from a bankrupt company, it would have been possible (easy) to void those contracts that they did not want to accept. Now they have had control for several months and have not done anything to change their contracts with consumers to say "we can drop this whenever we want with no compensation at all" or something like that, they would be open to a breach of contract suit. At this point, as expensive as it will be to provide service to a product line that they may no longer support, it will be cheaper to do that than deal with all those potential lawsuits.


/carmi


----------



## gweempose

Quote:

_Originally posted by avhokie_
*

Hi, this is your local car dealership. We've decided that we made a mistake and you paid too little for your car. We actually didn't mean to include the turbo, CD changer, or leather seats, even though the window sticker shows them. And yes, we might have even told you they were included. But we were wrong. So we need you to return your car. We'll refund your purchase price. In the meantime, we've put a boot on your car. Thanks and Merry Christmas!*
This is not a good analogy. It would have been better if the dealership gave the customer 30 days to return the car before booting it, but you're still not comparing apples to apples. There is fundamentally a huge difference between a car and a DVR. People rely on a car for transportation and to earn a living. It's pretty hard to argue that DNNA cost you money because you weren't able to record the most recent episode of _Friends_.


----------



## divofin

Quote:

_Originally posted by gweempose_
*This is not a good analogy. It would have been better if the dealership gave the customer 30 days to return the car before booting it, but you're still not comparing apples to apples. There is fundamentally a huge difference between a car and a DVR. People rely on a car for transportation and to earn a living. It's pretty hard to argue that DNNA cost you money because you weren't able to record the most recent episode of Friends. *
I guess that box of Category 5 cable, the crimper and connectors was free, as was the time running those cables, oh and that new cisco switch to plug them into, and rewiring the HT.... no cost at all.


----------



## GooberedUp

Quote:

_Originally posted by divofin_
*I guess that box of Category 5 cable, the crimper and connectors was free, as was the time running those cables, oh and that new cisco switch to plug them into, and rewiring the HT.... no cost at all.*
What people are wanting is specific performance. If the agreement breached was that you got an RTV with activation for $149.00 and then spent $300 on additional equipment, a damages amount of $449.00 is inadequate. In that case, specific performance may be requested to receive service.


RTV is screwed.


----------



## toots

I'm somewhat impressed by the amount of energy, rationalization, and warping of the space-time continuum being devoted to try to handwave away any of DNNA's responsibility here, but there's another issue, whether or not you believe that DNNA did anything wrong:


Twice this calendar year, DNNA have changed their service terms. When they bought the company, it was pay-for-subscription. Then, they went back to subscription-bundled, then back to pay-for-subscription.


I haven't been reading this board much, but even still, I caught wind of the previous confusion about whether 5000 series units being sold on eBay included bundled subscription or not. In fact, as a somewhat distant observer, it has been confusing as heck to me, all year, that if I buy a 5000 or 5500, will I or won't I be paying an additional subscription fee?


I guess the answer depends somewhat on the price of the unit itself - that if it's cheap, I'll have to pay for the sub and if it isn't, then I won't.


Which is a damned confusing way to do business, and not entirely clear, obvious, or even easy to explain to someone who hasn't been following this boondoggle from day 1.


This is the sign of a company that doesn't know what they're doing from one minute to the next, and above all (and undeniably), has done a crappy job of communicating with their customers.


I realize that many people here feel they have a proprietary interest in ReplayTV - either because they own a bunch of ReplayTV boxes, or because they think they have the ear of someone at DNNA, or like me, just because they think that the competition is inferior and would like this product to work - but all too often I've seen that interest blind people to the absolute Keystone Kops business practices that we've seen both before and since the DNNA buyout.


Which, for the consumer named me, is the bottom line. I don't give a flying fig whether the fault is DNNA's or someone else's. All I know is that this whole issue of "do I pay or don't I pay for a subscription" has been swirling around the ReplayTV brand name for nearly a year, and even when I come here, I get conflicting messages. Maybe the people who bought during the period of confusion are getting their subscriptions graced; maybe they're not.


I simply do not see foot-on-dong marketing exercises like these coming from the competition, so despite the fact that I find the competition's product specs inferior, I buy the competition, just because (aside from the fact that they work) I know what to expect from them and when.


----------



## sixt7gt350

Quote:

_Originally posted by gweempose_
*This is not a good analogy. It would have been better if the dealership gave the customer 30 days to return the car before booting it, but you're still not comparing apples to apples. There is fundamentally a huge difference between a car and a DVR. People rely on a car for transportation and to earn a living. It's pretty hard to argue that DNNA cost you money because you weren't able to record the most recent episode of Friends. *
Make that 10 days before booting and 30 days to return it......


----------



## s.bradford

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*There's no one even asking them to do this.


They always have the right to do that, but they will not. It said so on the box, I think *
ROTFLMAO


----------



## sixt7gt350

I sure miss toots being around.....


"ReplayTV: We've got our foot on our dong!"


----------



## sixt7gt350

I used logic similar to toots' last night when discussing satellite/cable/PVRs with multiple, affluent in-laws at the Christmas celebration. (my wife's brother came up from Texas....)


It was really sad that I had to recommend TiVo to them. 


Sour grapes from this recent debacle aside, I couldn't, in good conscience, tell them that ReplayTV was a better choice.


----------



## TimSH

Wow... look what happens when I don't check in here for a while.


I have to say that this is one of the biggest screwups I've ever seen... it boggles the mind that so many entities (DNNA, CC, RS, et. al.) could screw up in so many ways all at the same time. Myself, being an educated consumer, if I'd seen one of these for $149 at CC or RS, I would have first checked here to see if perhaps, Replay was to be no more. That would have been my first suspicion. But what about folks like my mother, grandmother, cousin, etc. Who've seen my Replay and would like one, who aren't exactly net-savvy? Had my cousin seen one for $149 with signage indicating service was included, I'll bet he would have bought it. And when they deactivated it and told him he owed more, what do you think would happen? He'd call his dad, a lawyer, and the real fun would begin.


We here an the educated minority. The masses will revolt when they realize what's happening.


All I can say is DNNA had better get their act together, and fast, or they're going to find themselves sued out of business. Even if they don't have to pay huge damages and/or fines, the legal fees alone agains the flood of lawsuits will cripple them.


This is really sad. I've been an advocate of Replay for a long time, so long as you don't count that period just prior to the DNNA acquisition when I had serious doubt as to their survival. Now, I'm almost embarrassed by them.


----------



## divofin

The power on agreement clearly states you have the option to contact DNNA for an address to ship the unit to at their expense for a full refund. That may be an option for some who are otherwise unable to return to the store.


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*And as for people who classified the dropping of the interoperability promise as an earlier "screwup", you clearly don't know the facts. Sorry, it's a sore spot for me when the messenger gets shot, especially the lengths Replay went through to try and find real solutions for users. Replay will always be the goat for some people.*
Justin this is clearly directed at me... it was my post and I didn't have the inter-op originally listed. I did that only after Tim stated it.


And just for the record... I think I do know the facts. I've been here long enough to have heard all sides of the story.


In this post:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...82#post3095882 


I stated:
Quote:

You've been around here a while, do you know all the ways ReplayTV has screwed over its customers? *They do come through in the end, but it's a tough battle for those involved.*


----------



## tluxon

Quote:

_Originally posted by sixt7gt350_
*I used logic similar to toots' last night when discussing satellite/cable/PVRs with multiple, affluent in-laws at the Christmas celebration. (my wife's brother came up from Texas....)


It was really sad that I had to recommend TiVo to them. 


Sour grapes from this recent debacle aside, I couldn't, in good conscience, tell them that ReplayTV was a better choice.*
I'm (and I think many of us are) right there with you. I've had a number of people ask me for recommendations, and I always point to the competition unless I know they want a techno-geek type object that can stand on its head and do flips if you cross your fingers just so despite barely having a pulse. It's like I'm thinking, "In 1984, would they have wanted a DOS-based PC or a GUI-based MAC?".


Tim


[edit] The PC - Mac analogy isn't a very good one except that the PC provided (in fact, required) more user tweaking, but the MAC was more bulletproof although it was canned.


----------



## gweempose

Quote:

_Originally posted by sixt7gt350_
*

I used logic similar to toots' last night when discussing satellite/cable/PVRs with multiple, affluent in-laws at the Christmas celebration. (my wife's brother came up from Texas....)


It was really sad that I had to recommend TiVo to them. 


Sour grapes from this recent debacle aside, I couldn't, in good conscience, tell them that ReplayTV was a better choice.*
Unfortunately, I have to agree with you on that one. As much as I love Replay, you have to be really worried about a company that continues to mess up this badly. The bottom line is that DNNA has done very little to instill even a smidgen of confidence since they took over. This is something that must be strongly considered when spending this kind of money on a product that is dependent on continued service to function.


----------



## Diode1

I also purchased a RS 5040, I did not trust what the guys at Radio Shack told me, "it came with three years of service at the discounted price"

So I had the RS clerk dial up Replay right from the store telephone.

Well after a few minutes waiting to speak to the activation line with Replay,

We gave them the serial number, my gut feeling had been verified, this 5040 did not have three years of service, The fine people at Replay told the both of us that it comes with a LIFETIME SERVICE! Replay even sent a email of confirmation. So where did I go wrong? Where did Radio Shack go wrong? Do you think I should just return it?

NOT 

I gave ALL parties involved the opportunity to correct any misinformation prior to the consummation of the transaction when the legal tender traded hands. I fully expect Replay to live up to this contract, the email was my way to have traceable communications.


Edit:

This was the store display model that never was used.


----------



## Sonyad

Can't believe the ridiculous stuff I hearing. I'd been MILDLY considering tivo/replaytv for some time but was not enthused by the price. There was an offer a couple of weeks ago to clear out some older rtv's but I found out too late. When I saw the new offer last week on Techbargains.com I jumped on it. The price was right for me. Obviously some you feel these sites are scams because they alert readers to deals, which only exist to take advantage of companies. According to some of you, only the MSRP should be honored. I'm sure when a company says free shipping, you send in an extra funds, or else you'd be taking advantage of them. Get real.


I ordered from Computers4sure.com, received it, finally got through the setup, and was greeted with message that what I bought wasn't forthcoming. I am a new PVR user. When the box said activation included, I figured a code or something would be bundled to activate the service. Talked to two women at the India support center who gave me bull about retail prices. I told them whether I stupidly paid $10,000 or wisely paid $1 to my brother, it's not their concern and I want the service my package was said to include. Contacted my retailer hoping to make some headway. Said they'd look into and call me back. They determined that RTV wouldn't activate. I promptly asked for a RMA since I didn't receive the product and services I paid for. RTV should be happy now. They will have their precious box back, they will have an unactivated non user whom they won't have to bother selling anymore boxes or subscriptions to, and a whole load of ill will stuck to their name and product.


Smart move.


----------



## telamon

Anyone else think this whole situation sounds like the final exam question from hell for some business management course?


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Sorry, I guess I make distinctions between ReplayTV (DNNA) and ReplayTV (Sonicblue) on this one... Not to divert the thread, but I'll put it this way: I'll take the company who is honest with me over the company that just makes promises. Others may not make that distinction, I grant *
Well, I have a different take on this...


Let's think back..

D&M offered $40M to buy ReplayTV and Rio

SonicBlue balked on the offer, and an auction was set up

D&M bought ReplayTV/Rio from Sonicblue at $36.4M (a savings of $3.6M over the initial offer, good deal SonicBlue!)


Along with this price came a $5M fund set up for "selected contractual relationships and liabilities." Would this include the things that SonicBlue promised the customers? I think it could.




Justin, I'm still a bit surprised you haven't commented on the changing of the guard at ReplayTV.


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by telamon_
*Retailers did pay a higher wholesale price for the units with bundled activation. From what pu82 said, they were instructed to sell at the lower price and unbundle the activation (remove the 3 year included sticker) while submitting the SNs for ones in inventory so they could be credited for the difference.


Now for someone like pu82 who's not as large as say RS or CC, that wouldn't be so hard to do. However with a distributed organization like CC, RS, CompUSA and the like the communication issues would screw things up. Process changes are difficult for any organization with multiple sites.*
Just for a moment think about this...


How many times did you have to enter/reread/rewrite your SN to be sure you got it correct? I don't think I've ever looked at that 16 digit code and NOT go it wrong.


So now retailers are tasked with writing down all the SNs they have and then reporting them to DNNA. So what happens if the retailer has an dyslexic employee write down the SNs?


I can easily see a retailer screwing up a SN, it's not that hard. Unless they use barcode readers (which some do).


This problem get worse and worse the more that is revealed.


I'll state this again my $499 Fry's box had the green sticker blacked out. Does that mean my SN was recorded as "unbundled"? I don't know. I've been told that the price is what proves what I paid, but now I'm going to have to potentially fight two battles to get this thing "right". *Let's punish the consumer!!! That's WRONG.*


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by bobo809_
*I called RTV on 12/17 and asked whether the service is included. I told the person that there's a big price drop and pointed him to amazon's website. He looked at it and went to consult the supervisor, came back and said all 550X comes with 3 years service.


I respect what you said, but I found it hard to believe all retailers made the same mistake at the same time. At the very least, RTV did not communicate the change effectively to their retail channels. They did not do enough to make sure this transition go smoothly. And to do this at the busiest time of the year for retailers, they deserve 100% of the blame. Period.*
I too called on 12/17 and was told the same thing.

I'm so pissed off at the way DNNA is handling this.


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by majortom_
*When acquiring assets from a bankrupt company, it would have been possible (easy) to void those contracts that they did not want to accept. Now they have had control for several months and have not done anything to change their contracts with consumers to say "we can drop this whenever we want with no compensation at all" or something like that, they would be open to a breach of contract suit. At this point, as expensive as it will be to provide service to a product line that they may no longer support, it will be cheaper to do that than deal with all those potential lawsuits.


/carmi*
See my post above about this, this is part of the $5M that was set aside for. This was another of the items covered by "selected contractual relationships and liabilities."


----------



## telamon

Quote:

_Originally posted by Jeff D_
*Just for a moment think about this...


How many times did you have to enter/reread/rewrite your SN to be sure you got it correct? I don't think I've ever looked at that 16 digit code and NOT go it wrong.


[snip...]


I'll state this again my $499 Fry's box had the green sticker blacked out. Does that mean my SN was recorded as "unbundled"? I don't know. I've been told that the price is what proves what I paid, but now I'm going to have to potentially fight two battles to get this thing "right". Let's punish the consumer!!! That's WRONG.*
I never said that getting the SNs wouldn't be error prone. I just think communicating a service/process change throughout a multi store retail chain is harder than collecting the SNs. Any chain the size of CC has to be use bar code readers. And I though pu82 said those SNs were being used to credit the retailers the difference in wholesale costs. I doubt that Replay has used those SNs for deactivation (yet). I strongly believe that they blanket deactivated all 5504s that had never called the mothership before (as pu82 also speculated) because every report of a 5504 being net connected for the first time after Saturday nights activation changes has come up with a grace period. I've seen no report on the FW threads to the contrary.


Now your Fry's might have done things better then most of the other retailers. The salesmen told you it didn't have service and they blacked out the sticker.


There still is the matter of a flyer inside the box that tells you that it includes 3 years of service. They should have taped something onto the box telling you to ignore the flyer inside and made sure it was on EVERY box sold at the new price. If Fry's had done that, then you wouldn't have a case. Just blacking out the green sticker isn't enough and gives you a case.


CompUSA seems to have not updated any of their signage as of yesterday and their staff is clueless (about what the device actually is, let alone the terms of service). CC might have signs posted and the salesmen may know that the price doesn't include activation, but they were still selling green stickered boxes. Radio Shack is a different matter since the boxes don't say any activation included on them.


----------



## toots

I can't help but think that this pooch is gonna be trotting bow-legged for quite some time to come.


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by telamon_
*I never said that getting the SNs wouldn't be error prone. I just think communicating a service/process change throughout a multi store retail chain is harder than collecting the SNs. Any chain the size of CC has to be use bar code readers. And I though pu82 said those SNs were being used to credit the retailers the difference in wholesale costs. I doubt that Replay has used those SNs for deactivation (yet). I strongly believe that they blanket deactivated all 5504s that had never called the mothership before (as pu82 also speculated) because every report of a 5504 being net connected for the first time after Saturday nights activation changes has come up with a grace period. I've seen no report on the FW threads to the contrary.


Now your Fry's might have done things better then most of the other retailers. The salesmen told you it didn't have service and they blacked out the sticker.
*
Sorry, I wasn't attacking your post, more that is DNNA expects there to be no errrors and user headaches over any misrecorded SN.


Fry's did a poor job, I got the box and didn't think anything of the blacked sticker. I had no idea what it said, I've never purchased a 55xx model before. For all I know the green sticker could have said "golden ticket inside". The sticker was blacked out, now does that mean the SN is blacklisted? If so why did I pay $499 for the box?!??!


I know you don't have the answers.


But, it's fuel for the fire that this is not a simple screwup. It's a concert of screwups.


----------



## telamon

Quote:

_Originally posted by Jeff D_
*Sorry, I wasn't attacking your post, more that is DNNA expects there to be no errrors and user headaches over any misrecorded SN.


Fry's did a poor job, I got the box and didn't think anything of the blacked sticker. I had no idea what it said, I've never purchased a 55xx model before. For all I know the green sticker could have said "golden ticket inside". The sticker was blacked out, now does that mean the SN is blacklisted? If so why did I pay $499 for the box?!??!


I know you don't have the answers.


But, it's fuel for the fire that this is not a simple screwup. It's a concert of screwups.*
Doh. I missed the part where you paid $499. Fry's screwing up that badly is more inline with the store I remember in my youth. They were pretty good before they over-expanded. Now they screw the consumer at every turn. Who needs computer shows with fly by night dealers when you have Fry's. (I grew up in the valley, but haven't set foot in a Fry's in over a year now. Like kicking a smoking habit.)


If you paid $499, then you definitely are entitled to 3 years of service (and converted to lifetime under the new pricing model). You have a receipt from Fry's that says you paid the old price.


If you didn't net connect yours for the first time yet, you will most likely be inconvenienced by the speculated blanket deactivation. NOTE, they didn't blacklist your SN. I think they just blanket deactivated EVERY 5504 unit that had never net connected before.


(Actually, if someone with a 5504 that was purchased before this whole mess and has been using it for a few months could plug their activation code into Service Activation and tell us if it says already activated or gives plan choices, we might have a better idea what they changed.)


You have two options:


1) A simple phone call (and possible fax) to RTV to prove you purchased under the old pricing and get lifetime.


2) Pricematch it at Fry's. Get $350 + tax (CA 8.25% still?) back. Then purchase lifetime for $299 from RTV. You saved ~$50 over option 1.


I will of course leave out option 3 which is a combination of 1 and 2 and is not something I would do myself.


----------



## arklab

Happy, HAPPY, *HAPPY* ,

Joy. JOY, *JOY* .


I was lucky enough to have purchased my 5060 from Costco, and after the initial software screw-ups and problems DIDN'T get lifetime activation as originally planned and stayed with the monthly plan.


Since Costco lets you return an unsatisfactory product whenever the customer likes (no time limit, not even years!), I have the luxury of waiting maybe a month or so to see if DNNS changes there mind or policy yet again!


Sadly, I must _REALLY_ wonder if Replay will stay in business even one more year.


You guys are really ticked-off, and YOU are the chosen few, the faithful, the cheering section for Replay.


With the deletion of ALL features that had separated Replay from the rest, why would anyone choose to buy these things.

Indeed even TIVO (as a stand-alone) has it's days numbered.


Now (or soon) folks can get PSX, TIVO with there cable box, Multimedia PC's that are small and offer the same functionality.


Those I really feel BAD for are all those here who will have paid for "lifetime" when the final message is sent by Replay that "lifetime" refers to Replay's lifetime and with DNNS's decision to file for bankruptcy and cease all operations.


For all those who can no longer get there money back from the store they bought it from.


DNNS/Replay is enough to just make you SICK to think about.


And it seems today the time has nearly come to just cut our losses and walk away from the constant drama that ReplayTV has become.

Life is too short and too precious.


Don't you think?


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by arklab_
*Those I really feel BAD for are all those here who will have paid for "lifetime" when the final message is sent by Replay that "lifetime" refers to Replay's lifetime and with DNNS's decision to file for bankruptcy and cease all operations.*
It is unlikely that DNNA will file for bankruptcy, even if it closes ReplayTv. Rio and Escient are both under that corporate entity. For that reason as well, it is unlikely that they will cease providing service even if they eliminate ReplayTv as a brand.

Quote:

*And it seems today the time has nearly come to just cut our losses and walk away from the constant drama that ReplayTV has become.

Life is too short and too precious.


Don't you think?*
This is may be true for some.


/carmi


----------



## tluxon

Quote:

_Originally posted by arklab_
*Happy, HAPPY, HAPPY ,

Joy. JOY, JOY .


I was lucky enough to have purchased my 5060 from Costco,...*
To possibly add to your Christmas cheer - You didn't happen to know that there's actually a 80 GB drive in that 5060, did you? Many on this forum have patched the drive to get the full 80 GB out of it.


Cheers,


Tim


----------



## Chriš2

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Okay, let's take this example and see if it's any good.


Ford produces a truck in 2003 with an "YM Satellite Radio" inside, and teams with "YM" for a three-month subscription with purchase of the truck, putting a sticker on the radio saying so. Eight months later, "YM" is done with the offer, and stops putting the stickers on.


Now let's say that it's 2004 and Joe's Ford has one of these 2003 trucks new still in stock, and never bothered to remove the sticker, even though they got the memo that the promotion was over. I buy the truck, and find out that I'm not getting my 3 months of service included. Do I have the right to demand service from "YM"? Do I have the right to demand money back from the dealer?


The analogy has problems, obviously, since the truck is still a truck without the radio. But I'm interested in other people's input on this.
*
I have re-written your analogy to more appropriately reflect the situation:


A person buys a 2004 Ford with 3 free months of sat radio included. There are stickers, promotional material, and all kinds of information from the dealer. Everything turns out A-OK for this person.


The next day Fords go on sale. I go in to take a look. All the promotional material is still there regarding the free sat radio service (the stickers in the car, the literature, etc). I even talk with the dealer about it. Being an extremely skeptical person, I even call Ford to verify! They explain the same thing to me.


So I happily go about my business using my new car for a week. All of a sudden on my way home from work one day, the radio goes out, then engine shuts off, and my car rolls to a stop on the side of the road. I realize that without the sat radio service, my car is a giant paperweight. I wonder what's going on, so I call Ford. They tell me "Sorry, we were wrong before, no free sat radio. You need to pay more money for your car to continue working. If you don't want to pay, get it back to the dealer and they will give you a refund".


Sound good?


----------



## KenC29

Quote:

_Originally posted by gweempose_
*I happen to be one of the people who purchased a unit from Radio Shack. I knew there was a high probability that the deal was too good to be true, but I wanted to get one for a friend as a wedding gift and I figured I had nothing to lose. Needless to say, I will be returning the Replay for a refund in the near future.


I just don't understand why so many people feel that they are entitled to keep the Replay for $150 and still get the service for free. As far as I can see, there were two logical ways for the retailers to deal with this situation:


1) Give the customer what they want (free service).

OR


2) Give the customer a full refund.


In my opinion, either of these solutions adequately rectifies the situation from a customer standpoint. Since option two is clearly available to everyone who bought one of these units, why are people still complaining? About the only argument that makes any sense to me is that either the store or DNNA owes us some sort of compensation for our time and aggravation. Perhaps they do, but isn't $300 a bit extreme?*
Yes, and I bought two of these RS units as gifts for my siblings. Of course, I already sent them, costing me $60 in postage. Do you think I'll get my $60 back? Not. Do you think it'll be fun telling my siblings on Xmas day that they can't open their package but will have to take it to their nearest RS for a refund? No. Do you think it'll be fun to tell them the whole sordid tale? No. Do you think some people will just eat the activation cost, rewarding the idiots for making a mistake? Yes. In my RS, they told me they only ever had two units in stock, and I bought both of them. Do you think they should be rewarded for their mistakes? I don't. I'm not even going to give my siblings a chance to choose whether they want to pay the subscription, and reward these incompetents.


----------



## SSFan

Quote:

_Originally posted by ChriÅ¡_
*I have re-written your analogy to more appropriately reflect the situation:

-snip-

Sound good?*
The modified analogy looks unbiased and well balanced. The original analogy was slanted pro-RTV and anti-retailer (in my opinion.)


----------



## Roto

Quote:

_Originally posted by tluxon_
*

I'm especially discouraged that I haven't seen a single press release by DNNA regarding this fiasco. I can only conclude that they were worried about perception and covering their behinds, which is the wrong thing to do. I would've been able to maintain more respect for them had they been upfront and candid and forthcoming about the whole deal as soon as they were remotely aware of it. Now it looks like someone who's saying they can't tell us anything until they speak to their lawyer. I've defended their position, but there's no defense for their lack of public action.


Cheers,


Tim*
I agree 100%. Not just their lack of public action, but also the CSRs being as misinformed as the retailers. I expected an official statement by now, but so far all we have is more speculation and rumors of insider info. I have 3 units that were still working as of last night, 2 from Radio Shack and 1 from Circuit City. Tonight I'm finally going to just go ahead and start using them. They've been sitting in a stack just waiting to go back in the boxes if needed.


----------



## brian7972

[optimist]


Perhaps the silence from DNNA is due to their putting together a response (i.e. circle the wagons, come up with a fix, decide on it, set the infrastructure up to roll it out, etc...a la the trade in solution for the interop issues).


[/optimist]


----------



## KenC29

Quote:

_Originally posted by Snarler_
*When was the last time you went into a store, saw something that you knew NOTHING about for $150 and bought it? If you know something about RTV, you know about TiVo, and seeing a $300 price difference should raise an eyebrow that makes you wonder why. Finally, I scouted around for one for myself (again, knowing it was probably a mistake that would be corrected) and saw some (online) at nearby CC's. I checked back again a couple of hours later and they were all gone. So anyone who bought one "just because" would have had a few hours MAX to do it in, so the window of opportunity wasn't there for random sales.

--

Daniel*
I suppose I"m part of the 5% minority. I knew "NOTHING" about RTV. I happened into RS to look at the RC cars as presents for my nephews. I do have a EyeTV DVR for my Mac, so I have no interest in getting a DVR for myself, and so have not paid any attention to pricing of TIVOs or RTVs. My EyeTV works great, records everything I want, allows me to edit in the program, and burn to VCD and DVD very easily. I'm not exactly sure what the subscription gives one that I don't get from my EyeTV, other than allowing recording of similar programs. So, I don't value the subscription program very much at all.


Anyhow, I did see the RTV unit on sale, the price tag was the typical RS half-red one, wit the Retail price of $499, and the line below stating SAVE $350, and a final price of $149. Usually, I don't bite if a price includes a big rebate, as those are sketchy, but this was an in-store savings. I knew how great my EyeTV was, and assumed my less computer savvy bro and sis would love the benefit of a DVR without the need to hook it up to a computer.


Did I "raise an eyebrow"? No, there were no TIVOs to compare the price to. I did know that 40Gig harddrives are small in today's world, and it seemed to me that it would be reasonable to assume that the mfr was probably phasing out these small harddrive units. I also know that Xmas has some incredible technology sales to drive foot traffic. And, when I asked the salesman about the price, he indicated that this RS had NEVER sold a single box before. They had two in inventory, and that was it. So, based upon the evidence, it didn't "raise an eyebrow".


Now, the salesman affirmed the unit included 3-yr activation, and it was clear on a cardboard cutout that that was the case. How do you "SAVE $350", if you don't get activation? How do you have the same stock number #16-3275 if it's not the same item? How do you compare the price of the retail unit to the sale unit, if they're not offering the same thing? You can't. I did my due diligence, and was happy to spend $300 on two units, knowing nothing about RTV.


----------



## KenC29

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Because "regardless of price" isn't a phrase used by most people in business.


Hey, some people seem to get the idea that I'm defending Replay on this, and I'm not. I just happen to be assigning more blame to the retailers than others may be inclined to do.


As poorly managed as this was by Replay, I'm just astonished that no one thinks that the stores share any blame on this. Think about it: these were slow moving products, and I think the retailers were happy to move these units off their shelves, regardless of the number of times (as recounted here many times) they were convinced that there was a mistake. I'm sure the salespeople were happy to ring up the sales, confident that as long as the computer said it was OK, then they were covered. And because of the FatWallet thread, I believe that by the time anyone at Replay had a chance to try and take action, all the units were just gone. All it would have taken to stop this madness was one smart person in each store or even store district to say "hmmm, this doesn't sound right" and speak up. Just one. Whatever was done wrong by Replay, I think each person who bought one of these with no mention of a service plan change was done a disservice by the retailers.*
Actually, if you read my post from yesterday, I DID BLAME RS for this snafu. However, the reason why others are also placing blame on Replay is that it appears they were idiotic in how they handled the subcription change, which probably contributed to the retailer confusion. It's called causation. Why you seem to be "astonished" is ASTONISHING!


----------



## divofin

I don't see any way out of this for DNNA except to allow any (and all) 5xxx unit to have lifetime activation. Many units are already activated and promises have been made. Many units sit unopened until tomorrow and the next day. Some units are still in the supply chain. There is no way to know what is what on anything manufactured prior to 12/17 or so. Faxing in receipts is dubious and unreasonable and not even possible in some cases. A receipt for $499 doesn't even prove anything except that at one time one was bought at $499, this was alluded to earlier and I won't spell it out.


I do believe that somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% of units activated after 12/17 were purchased for $149.


What a mess. Maybe that is the reason for no response, there really is absolutely nothing that can be done at this point that will make things right.


----------



## abreuma

The ReplayTV site has been updated with a simple message that says that if you paid the new lower price you'll need to pay for activation.


I'd post the URL but I can't - yet.


----------



## Diode1

 http://www.digitalnetworksna.com/replaytv/default.asp# 

IMPORTANT NEWS!


ReplayTV recently changed its pricing model to provide customers with a lower unit price and to give them two service subscription options ($12.95 monthly and $299 product lifetime). Our retail partners were asked to help implement this pricing change in a variety of ways. Unfortunately, certain retailers may not have taken the appropriate steps to change the pricing model resulting in potential confusion for customers.


The new ReplayTV 5500 units purchased at the reduced prices below require that users choose one of the two subscription options.


5504 $149.99

5508 $299.99

5516 $449.99

5532 $799.99


Customers who have purchased these units will be notified that they will need to subscribe to the ReplayTV service at one of the two prices above. Customers can avoid any interruption of service by subscribing at ReplayTV.com.


Understandably, some customers may wish to return the product due to the additional required fees, and should resolve the matter with their retailer. We sincerely apologize for any confusion.


----------



## Scyber

Random thought: It was theorized on this board that DNNA never actually manufactured any of the 5k series, they just manufactured the 5.5k series. Any of the 5k series in the retail chains were actually manufactured by Sonicblue.


If this is the case, then it is possible that DNNA was making a profit even when selling the 5k series from RS at $150. It depends on how much Sonicblue valued that existing inventory during the purchase.


I already returned my 5k to RS, so it don' matter to me, but I figured I would through that out there.


----------



## sixt7gt350

Well that announcement doesn't say diddly squat about 5XXX units.


It also doesn't say how they plan to go about verifying the newly circumcised.....


----------



## Diode1

Make things worse by blaming your sales network.

This is going to get very messy.

Also this does not have the date stamp of the press release of 12-22-03.

At that time the price change took effect according to Replay.

Anything purchased prior was just a good find with service.


----------



## tedler

So there it is....they are officially blaming the retailers... ha!


----------



## divofin

Direct URL http://www.digitalnetworksna.com/message.html


----------



## icecow

To avoid further confusion we are switching back to our regular $499.99 price effective 12/19/03 which--depending on your serial number-- includes a lifetime subscription or Two years of free service and a monthly rate of $11.89(if you have your reciept) thereafter.


We appologize for any confusion,

DNNA


----------



## tluxon

I daresay that not all those who bought at reduced prices purchased at the "prices below". In addition, it doesn't list the 5K units, only the 5.5K units. I've been a DNNA apologist and this looks dubious at best and IMO very unprofessional.


Also, why wasn't this message placed on their website as soon as they got wind of units going out the door at the lower prices? This is extremely negligent!


Tim


----------



## divofin

Quote:

_Originally posted by tedler_
*So there it is....they are officially blaming the retailers... ha!*
ha!


I'm not fond of the way this is worded:
Quote:

Understandably, some customers may wish to return the product due to the additional required fees, and *should resolve the matter with their retailer*. We sincerely apologize for any confusion.


----------



## JWeavis

Well, I get the nag message on the Replay, but when I actually go to active the Replay I get "That unit has already been activated. Please check your number and try again."


It was purchased before 12/22.


----------



## kyleAV

Ok, it's my 1st post. No flames please 


I've been watching this drama and yes I have two units purchased as gifts and I'm wondering what to do now. As I see it DNNA is approaching their golden hour and I hope they are consulting their lawyers. Many have posted how much money Tivo loses vs DNNA in the last year. It made me think how much money companies spend on advertising. If DNNA got out there now before this hits the fan on Christmas Day with a good PR rep and announced a terrible error took place and thousands of units were sold at $149.99 with service included when they shouldn't have, but then said they would honor all subscriptions on units sold up to the 12/22/03 announcement and then wished the world and the new Replay customers a very Merry Christmas from ReplayTV. Wouldn't that kind of publicity be worth the $1.5 million some have suggested might be the hit on this? DNNA could come out of this looking great and people hoping one day they give stuff away again. As a promo maybe they could toss in a subscription in a box for a lucky buyer. Kind of like finding the groovy M&M or something along those lines. It just seems to me that when this comes to light on the 25th its quite possible that individuals wont have to file suits. Their states attorneys might and I'm sure there are federal laws covering this. I'm not a lawyer so I don't really know. I'm in a holding pattern with everyone else. But I do know ultimately DNNA wont get out of this without it costing them money. I just hope they find a better course then the path they seem to have chosen.



Opps, looks like they did while i was typing


----------



## tluxon

Quote:

*

Customers who have purchased these units will be notified that they will need to subscribe to the ReplayTV service at one of the two prices above.*
Oh sure - like they know who those customers are. If they had a clue they wouldn't have used a blanket deactivation.


DNNA - if you check back on my posts since 12/17, you will see that I was one of your staunchest defenders. Well, no more. You should be ashamed of yourselves. This whole matter has been handled in a most subversive and devious manner. You act like you didn't know anything was wrong until you made your announcement nearly a week later. This is inexcusable! You have not been forthcoming and unless you were DEAD you've known about this issue from the start. If you don't exercise a little LEADERSHIP and apologize publicly with press releases and explain why you let this go for almost an entire week, I will NOT recommend ANY of your products to ANYONE!!!


----------



## tedler

Wow...Luxon...I never thought I would hear this from you!


----------



## ned215

Quote:

_Originally posted by Diode1_
* http://www.digitalnetworksna.com/replaytv/default.asp# 

IMPORTANT NEWS!


snip

snip


Understandably, some customers may wish to return the product due to the additional required fees, and should resolve the matter with their retailer. We sincerely apologize for any confusion.*
"Some customers" may wish to return the product? If they truly believe that boy are they in for a surprise. It would probably end up being something like 95% of the customers except that a large number of units have been eBayed.


Dan


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

_Originally posted by brian7972_
*[optimist]


Perhaps the silence from DNNA is due to their putting together a response (i.e. circle the wagons, come up with a fix, decide on it, set the infrastructure up to roll it out, etc...a la the trade in solution for the interop issues).


[/optimist]*
Hmmm...this is like the 5th time I've been wrong today... :sigh:


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

Unfortunately, certain retailers may not have taken the appropriate steps to change the pricing model resulting in *potential* confusion for customers.
As a lawyer who has written his share of butt-covering language, this word jumps right out at me. I know DNNA would never want to admit to "actual" confusion, but their use of this word is a little disingenous since I'm sure the person who wrote/proofed/contributed to the explanation has been reading this thread all day long.


----------



## Diode1

I see no mention that their own Replay Service Activation Agents & Supervisors agreed that the service is 3-years or Lifetime for given products & serial numbers.

Not only overseas, also here within the USA.


I mean, Why did they ask for sticker colors if the stickers did not matter.


Do you think this was left out intentionally


----------



## joelfreak

Well, DNNA...all I can say is BRING ON THE LAWSUITS...I wont be sueing...but I bet you the amount of money you will loose from legal fees, lost goodwill and the like will make this cost ALOT more than other avenues you could have taken. This is perhaps the worst business move possible. There is nothing said about gifts and nothing said about how prices will be verified. Also, it's Xmas time. There is no way in the WORLD I am going to stand on line at CC to return something at this time of year. It would be at LEAST a 1 hour wait...This is just horrid...I had faith they would choose to do the right thing, but oh well...


----------



## brian7972

I was just browsing to Tivo forums to see what their take on this is, and I came across a post from a Tivo owner who (before the confusion) went to RS and bought 2 units at $149.99 (i.e. probably one of the non-FW "honest" purchasers). He said he's keeping his Tivo, but liked the RTV too: "But in others (free sharing between units (hear that, Tivo?), free pictures from my computer, built-in network jack) it is better."


Then, once the drama unfolded: "And most of those units have been de-activated. I know of 4 myself and there are dozens of people at FW and the Replay forum reporting the same. Oh well, I returned mine to RS tonight. Sad thing is that I love the ability to copy the shows to a PC for either later streaming back to the Replay unit or burning on DVD, but the wife absolutely vetoed paying $9.95/mo for it (I was halfway willing). She said, and I agree, that the Tivo interface is just easier and better and she'd rather pay $12.99/mo for it."


What a shame. DNNA had a chance to get into a Tivo owner's home and possibly win the person over, but it ain't gonna happen. (Yes, I know that the person probably wouldn't have bought the units if the price was "right," but still..."


----------



## tarfin

Unbelievably stupid even for a company known for making boneheaded moves. Let's hope that DNNA gets a lot of legal gift certificates under the tree. They'll need them. The state AGs are going to be licking their chops after the holidays.


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

_Originally posted by tarfin_
*Unbelievably stupid even for a company known for making boneheaded moves. Let's hope that DNNA gets a lot of legal gift certificates under the tree. They'll need them. The state AGs are going to be licking their chops after the holidays.*
I'm not so sure that DNNA would be stuck in the end on this, legally (PR/goodwill-wise is a whole other story). If they provided timely update/product information to the retailers and for one reason or the other the retailers didn't/couldn't/wouldn't follow those instructions (provided they are reasonable), I think DNNA would have some good arguments to avoid liability, to the extent there is any.


It will be interesting to see how it shakes out.


----------



## joelfreak

Easy legal way to fix that. Sue, naming DNNA as well as the retailers. Let them fight it out on their own. Thats the way this would probably be done.

NOTE: I am NOT saying we should all sue DNNA, I am just chiming in with a comment.


----------



## brian7972

Quote:

_Originally posted by joelfreak_
*Easy legal way to fix that. Sue, naming DNNA as well as the retailers. Let them fight it out on their own. Thats the way this would probably be done.

NOTE: I am NOT saying we should all sue DNNA, I am just chiming in with a comment.*
Yep, you nailed the standard class action approach: sue the world and let them sling the mud on their side. On the merits though, DNNA would appear to have some decent defenses if they're correct that the retailers dropped the ball.


I am curious as to what the instructions to the retailers were...change the signs a week before Christmas, retrain your sales staff the week before Christmas, peel off/cover the green stickers on every box the week before Christmas, etc....kind of a lot to ask of retailers at this time of year if you ask me (my sole "proof" of that is the across-the-board ball dropping by the retailers...if only one dropped the ball, shame on them, but for RS, CC and Amazon to be "confused" by the message, I'm curious what the message was.)


All I know is that asking these retailers to do _anything_ in a "variety of ways" the week before Christmas was a recipe for disaster.

Quote:

Our retail partners were asked to help implement this pricing change in a variety of ways.


----------



## tarfin

If 1 retailer messed it up then I'd see people wanting to believe that DNNA sent proper/understandable instructions. Given that EVERY ONE of the retailers had the same price point and noted that service was included its pretty obvious that didn't happen.


I'm pissed off but I certainly don't have the desire to sue anyone over this. I will however spread as much of the story as far as I can. Sad because I had convinced a 2nd co-worker to buy just as this was unfolding. Now I've got to let him know what kind of company RPTV/DNNA is.


I don't think you could've written a better how NOT to give customer service lesson if you tried.


Edit: Apparently Brian and I were posting at the same time. GMTA


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by ChriÅ¡_
*I have re-written your analogy to more appropriately reflect the situation:
*
Uhm, not exactly, but I appreciate the effort.


----------



## Diode1

Class action approach would be far to easy for them, first let a few thousand private party small claim courts be decided.

Maybe by then DNNA would ask the court for a final class action themselves.


----------



## toots

Lots closer than your analogy.


----------



## icecow

Mind fart, 2nd rate BS prediction/speculation:

I doubt many/any personal suits will be filed. There's got to be at least a 50% chance that some low-profile lawyer will start a class action suit. It might be a small one, but lead to more woes to DNNA. If a class action suit is filed, who is the class action suit going to be filed against, the 3 main retailers, or DNNA? Either way would alienate the retailers that distribute the product.


yada yadda, ok if I keep going this post is starting to look too much like something I've already read.


cow


----------



## jleavens

I doubt many small claims suits will be filed, and those that do get filed will most likely end with the filer getting their money back for the units (having to return it). I also estimate that half of the units will be returned, and half of them will be "properly" activated by their new owners (properly as defined by Replay).


Class-action? I'm sure someone will try. The question is: even with success, what will be left for the users? $75 off activation?


----------



## sixt7gt350

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*I doubt many small claims suits will be filed, and those that do get filed will most likely end with the filer getting their money back for the units (having to return it). I also estimate that half of the units will be returned, and half of them will be "properly" activated by their new owners (properly as defined by Replay).

*
Based upon observation here and at FW, I would say 65% returned, 34% activated under less than honest circumstances, 1% activated properly.


If the units weren't flying off the shelves before, what makes you think so many will keep them?????


----------



## icecow

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Class-action? I'm sure someone will try. The question is: even with success, what will be left for the users? $75 off activation? *
Yeah, only $75 because it was a slam dunk and the lawyers get the other $225. Meanwhile, DNNA are saying it's the retailer's fault, the retailers are signing depositions on their own behalf and not carrying the ReplayTV line to appear consistant. All awhile the lawyers are sitting around like a taxi driver with the meter on. And every news story that does see light is accompanied with the soundbyte that sounds something like "....who denied the service to ### buyers days before christmas saying it was a pricing mistake..."


If you hear anything about ReplayTV over the next few years, that will probably be it.



I'm not sure if I'm exaggerating or not, but if I am it's no more then you are trivializing it.


If they denied all of these people smartly, shrewdly, and came out looking good to my own detriment I would smirk approvingly, but unless they are going through the shakedown stages(encourage returns, offer $150 service amnesty, settle with extremists who hold out and let them keep service) it seems to me they are just making things worse, and going to pay two ways.


I secretly route for DNNA at times even though I'd consider this a no brainer if it was another company. If this happened to Tivo instead of ReplayTV I'd be laughing. Tivo deserved it all along for deceptively putting units on the shelves for cheap and charging 'service' in small print..selling the thing twice.


This story is like something that would happen on a playground. A overweight Bully 6th grader invites an boyish 6th grader to help him shake down a bunch of 4th graders for some milk money. The boy says, "nah, not only will it not pan out, it's just wrong". The Bully comes back day after day with $22, $16, $21.. bucks. The fifth day the Bully has to go to a doctor appointment and doesn't come to school. So the boy, with a proven stratigy, goes over to shake down the 4th graders for milkmoney. But he trips, and all the 4th graders, sick of the oppression, lynch him ferousiously. Then the principal comes out and cans the boys ass real good and calls the parents. The bully comes back monday and acts like he had nothing to do with it.


cow



cow


----------



## tarfin

I'm thinking more like 95% returns, 4% pay activation (probably because it was given as a gift) and 1% keep/activate the unit for themselves.


Edit: Spelling


----------



## Pete Rod

95%, 10%, 5%.......

All I know is That the two I have will be 100% returned.


----------



## jmace57

I have one 5508 ordered 12/17. I suspect I will NOT get the activation promised in literature, websites, and in my order confirmation.


But I'm pissed off enough now that I'll open the box, and I will try and activate it on Christmas. Then return it. Then the retailer (Tech Depot via Amazon) can take their lump on shipping and restocking charges...and Replay can have another "open box" that they have to discount in order to sell.


I cannot believe it took 5 days for Replay to come up with ANY response, even full of weasel-wording.


I did not pay the $299 fee shown in the press release...I paid $240. So what does that mean?


I'm a TiVo owner, but had an open mind about ReplayTV. Had.


Merry Christmas.


Jim


----------



## djMaxM

I dunno about small claims and class action, it's kind of hard to draw any real damages (although I didn't put it under somebody's tree and then look like an idiot on Christmas). HOWEVER, I'll definitely be calling the Massachusetts AG and the FTC. As I mentioned before, I've been on the other end of this kind of thing before (we swallowed a HUGE loss and made it good with our customers straight off) and the FTC still hit us with a decent size fine. (And in fact would have MADE us make it right with the customers probably, if we hadn't already done so). This is without question a fine-able offense, although I totally agree with jtleavens that there is blame to go around. Something about "kill-em-all-and-let-god-sort-it-out" jumps to mind, even though it's a horrid expression.


So for everybody who's pissed, call your state AG and the FTC. FTC complaint form can be found here:

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


Just filed mine, here was my text:


(Computers/Internet Services) was best match on "subject" I thought

Company: ReplayTV - Digital Networks North America (DNNA)

2600 San Tomas Expressway

Santa Clara, CA 95051-0953


Email: [email protected] (I figure the MBA's should know enough to get the lawyers in a hurry)


Problem:

I purchased a ReplayTV model 55 from . I received the box, which had a big green sticker from the manufacturer which said "This ReplayTV unit includes 3 years of ReplayTV service!". Their web site stated "All 5500 models include a 3-year subscription to ReplayTV." When attempting to use the device, I was informed that it DID NOT include service and that they simply would not provide it. While I can return the product, I feel that this was deceptive advertising and that they should be forced to provide the product that they sold me, or be held responsible for their error.


We shall see!


----------



## djMaxM

I kind of doubt that ReplayTV reads these boards at this point, but if they do, I have a proposal for what they coulda/shoulda/could still do.


Offer people service for $150, eat $75 and make the retailer eat $75. Given that the retailer probably already gets a kick back (which they could also eliminate for these units), it probably ends up costing them like $50 a unit in the end, which I can't imagine is more than what this will end up costing them in legal fees. (Say they sold 5000 units? So even on the $75 that would be $375k, NPV discounted since they could offer "lifetime only", so like $300k compared to a battle, a lot of lost sales, and a hell of a lot of ill will.


----------



## ejpbowie

djMaxM, I like your suggestion to split the difference, and it could even make me THINK about keeping my 5504. If it was a 5040, I would probably keep it, because I already have one and love the auto CA.


I bought mine on the 20th at a CompUSA for $149. So guess what? Here it is 12/23, and I stopped in ANOTHER CompUSA about 15 miles away and they still have the units marked at $499 and $599 WITH ACTIVATION INCLUDED. Don't know if it would ring up differently at the register, but can you imagine someone paying the $499, then getting home and finding out that DNNA tells them they need to pay AGAIN to activate it or PROVE that they paid full price for it before they will activate it?!


----------



## Diode1

Look what kind of files the Minnesota AG office had the tobacco corps release, these alone opened the flood gates for many states to cash in.

And their offices are even open tomorrow at 9:am,

A preemptive strike is always best 

If played correctly, a stay can be ordered in no time by the courts.


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by Pete Rod_
*95%, 10%, 5%.......

All I know is That the two I have will be 100% returned.*
Open 'em up and send a message back to DNNA.


----------



## fleegs79

I too would like to see them offer some sort of compromise. I was thinking more around the $100 range, but would probably consider and get it at the $150 price.


But if that doesnâ€™t happen, it will be going back. I like the idea of pausing and rewinding live TV and setting up recording channels for shows, but using it with a cable box is so-so. Also, I was a little disappointed with the PQ. I am using S-Video from the cable box to RTV then to the TV and I did a PIP split screen with the coaxial input on my 47â€ HDTV and the coax was crisper and had better colors during the Vikings/Chiefs game on Saturday. I actually surprised me a little to see it that muddy, but there was some action. $450 total is definitely not worth it to me.


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by djMaxM_
*I kind of doubt that ReplayTV reads these boards at this point, but if they do, I have a proposal for what they coulda/shoulda/could still do.
*
Oh they are reading... reading, but not commenting. I'm sure the FW thread is getting eyeballs too.


Then there's two marketing guys sitting there sipping champange thinking.... what a wonderful Christmas this will be....


This whole situation has me sick. I can't believe what's transpired and how it's been handled by the parties involved.


It's a good product, but with this kind of crap going on every 2-3 months I have no faith in the company.


Anyone want to buy some lifetime activated 3k and 5k replayTVs?


----------



## sfhub

Quote:

_Originally posted by Jeff D_
*Oh they are reading... reading, but not commenting. I'm sure the FW thread is getting eyeballs too.*
I wonder how much trouble could have been avoided if someone from

Replay simply posted on page10 (and 20, 30, 40, etc.) of the chubby

wallet thread what is on the website right now. It's not like they've

never posted on there before.


I wonder how much time it would have taken to put that message in

the messages the units download at initial setup so people could wonder

why they had "power loss" messages from september along with realizing

right away the pricing changes.


If someone was especially adventurous modify the 55xx pause ad which

first announced the new (now old) 3yr bundled pricing, with photoshop.


I feel safe in claiming at least 95% of the units where confusion was

present have contacted replay by way of the initial setup and that avenue

of communication was not used, even though it seemed the most

appropriate, especially with people constantly forcing net connects.


My understanding is the new OS is better capable at "targeting" messages

so I'm assuming they wouldn't need to carpet bomb everyone.


----------



## rainbow_wahine

Quote:

_Originally posted by tarfin_
*I'm thinking more like 95% returns, 4% pay activation (probably because it was given as a gift) and 1% keep/activate the unit for themselves.


Edit: Spelling*
At that point, RTV will reverse their offical statement and say "ya know, it was a mistake, we are going to give activation to all the improperly priced units that are still out in the field.


Of course that's when they are all back..........


----------



## rainbow_wahine

Quote:

_Originally posted by jmace57_
*I have one 5508 ordered 12/17. I suspect I will NOT get the activation promised in literature, websites, and in my order confirmation.


But I'm pissed off enough now that I'll open the box, and I will try and activate it on Christmas. Then return it. Then the retailer (Tech Depot via Amazon) can take their lump on shipping and restocking charges...and Replay can have another "open box" that they have to discount in order to sell.


I cannot believe it took 5 days for Replay to come up with ANY response, even full of weasel-wording.


I did not pay the $299 fee shown in the press release...I paid $240. So what does that mean?


I'm a TiVo owner, but had an open mind about ReplayTV. Had.


Merry Christmas.



Jim*
Maybe not....it goes back to RTV, gets reborn as a refurb and then gets sold for $359 (it is an 80 hour, right?) including lifetime activation. They still got more than what you paid for it.


----------



## Crrink

I certainly won't pay DNNA for service on this unit.

Even if I found it compelling enough to keep, I'd go return it to CC and grab one of the many open box units they're sure to have for whatever markdown they give them.


DNNA will get in trouble over this, mark my words.


----------



## bobo809

I think this is unlikely because they would dig the hole deeper. They are already committing false advertising, and to ask more money from the customer would constitute bait and switch. In my state (DE), the penalty for each offence is $10k. If this is true for other states, multiply this by 2,000 to 10,000 units sold. You are talking about millions of dollars. FTC and state AG would be interested to go after ReplayTV and slap them a big fine or more likely a settlement. Good luck. ReplayTV.

Quote:

_Originally posted by djMaxM_
*I kind of doubt that ReplayTV reads these boards at this point, but if they do, I have a proposal for what they coulda/shoulda/could still do.


Offer people service for $150, eat $75 and make the retailer eat $75. Given that the retailer probably already gets a kick back (which they could also eliminate for these units), it probably ends up costing them like $50 a unit in the end, which I can't imagine is more than what this will end up costing them in legal fees. (Say they sold 5000 units? So even on the $75 that would be $375k, NPV discounted since they could offer "lifetime only", so like $300k compared to a battle, a lot of lost sales, and a hell of a lot of ill will.*


----------



## Jeff D

Well, I haven't brough it up yet, but I guess now is as good a time as any...


I saw all the threads about new pricing, but did no look at any of them the first day the 17th I believe. I though... blah.


I even went and purchased a $500 one from Fry's on the 17th unaware of what was going down. I had no idea there was a new price. I posted 15 messages on the 17th and nothing about these prices (If I had only looked, but I was busy helping others)


On the 18th I actually looked at one of the threads. I was surpirsed to see the change to say the least.


My first reaction was.... I just got screwed! (in fact my first post on this was stating if replay screwed up its not the buyer's fault) I then pointed out my situation.


After thinking I got screwed I thoug... New model?!?!? "FIRE SALE"?!?!? Are they unloading these things to make room for a new model that they'll release at CES? I quickly checked with ReplayTV's CS and then CC to see what the deal was. ReplayTV's CS said nothing and CC said $149 with activation. Nothing says that there's anything special about these new units.


I flashed back to the refurb clearance and the $249 price tag. Those things flew out of the warehouse. A person who witnessed the refurb fire sale would have no more reason to suspect that $249 was any more of a mistake than the $149. If DNNA was planning on moving these quicker than the refurb models then this is the price to do it at!




For a company to reprice the units and change the package without changing the package has got to hold some sort of legal liability.


You can't just change a price and a plan and expect the consumer to understand. And you can't expect the consumer to "cover" for a bad execution of a bad plan.


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Okay, let's take this example and see if it's any good.


Ford produces a truck in 2003 with an "YM Satellite Radio" inside, and teams with "YM" for a three-month subscription with purchase of the truck, putting a sticker on the radio saying so. Eight months later, "YM" is done with the offer, and stops putting the stickers on.


Now let's say that it's 2004 and Joe's Ford has one of these 2003 trucks new still in stock, and never bothered to remove the sticker, even though they got the memo that the promotion was over. I buy the truck, and find out that I'm not getting my 3 months of service included. Do I have the right to demand service from "YM"? Do I have the right to demand money back from the dealer?


The analogy has problems, obviously, since the truck is still a truck without the radio. But I'm interested in other people's input on this.


I am really stuck on the disconnect here:

Replay: "Drop the price and tell the customers service isn't included"

Retailer: "Yes, the price is $149 and service is included"


Obviously the retailers got part of the message, but aren't being held responsible for the other part, by customers or Replay. I have no idea why that is, except to speculate that the retailers have more power over Replay than Replay over the retailers.*


Justin's bad example... *5504 is still THIS year's model*. The 5500 line was released *THREE* months ago. This does not constitute "next year" or "last year's model". The pricing plan started with the 5500 that was released in September, 3 year activation was included. Remember your "demo days" training? I do.


On top of that DNNA did not make any public declaration of a price change until 12/22, the same day the change *WAS* to take effect. This was 5 days after the price dropped at many retailers.


I know you said you aren't defending DNNA, but a lot of your comments sound that way.


You said it all in your last sentance... the retailer has the manufacturer by the balls. If they don't want to carry the product they won't. Do you know why panasonic products aren't on the shelves at Good Guys stores? Because the manuacturer tried to strong arm the retailer. You know what happened? The retailer said... we aren't carrying panasonic products anymore. Who do you thing loses here?


DNNA is kissing retailers ass to have the products on the shelves. SB left many retailers with a bad feeling about ReplayTV. And DNNA is doing what they can to correct the situtation. A problem like this is going to have MAJOR problems for the retailers. And I said it before... if the retailer suffers, DNNA will suffer. It's that simple. It's not easy getting shelf space and it's going to be a hell of a lot harder with a problem like this looming over DNNA's head.


----------



## ZiggyGT

I see all of this is bad news for my subscription on my old unit. These guys just killed the new reformulated replay. the business model did not include this mess. When they go bankrupt no one will touch it. Our service is dead.


They need to figure out a way to salvage it. New feature that have additional fees or something.


Perhaps CC, Compusa jumped the gun to dump the stock they thought they were going to be stuck with. They seized the mistake by Replay to dump all the stor stock. They know it is going nowhere.


really too bad.


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by brian7972_
*Yep, you nailed the standard class action approach: sue the world and let them sling the mud on their side. On the merits though, DNNA would appear to have some decent defenses if they're correct that the retailers dropped the ball.*
DNNA's problem is that is does not matter if their retail partners are completely to blame, when this is all over, they will be the major (and possibly) only loser. If retailers are forced legally to cover this cost and they cannot force DNNA to reimburse them, then they will just drop all DNNA product lines (and if they are really angry, all D&M products).

Quote:

*I am curious as to what the instructions to the retailers were...change the signs a week before Christmas, retrain your sales staff the week before Christmas, peel off/cover the green stickers on every box the week before Christmas, etc....kind of a lot to ask of retailers at this time of year if you ask me (my sole "proof" of that is the across-the-board ball dropping by the retailers...if only one dropped the ball, shame on them, but for RS, CC and Amazon to be "confused" by the message, I'm curious what the message was.)


All I know is that asking these retailers to do anything in a "variety of ways" the week before Christmas was a recipe for disaster.*
I have to agree that asking retailers to make any changes to product on their shelves between Thanksgiving and Christmas is a serious problem. So much so that I am not sure how they actually expected it to get done.


I have talked to friends that have trained Blue Shirts at Best Buy and other CE store staff. They say that under ideal circumstances, getting fifty percent of them to care enough to actually do what you have told them is hard. Here they did not have real training, just a memo (at best). Several hours into this, DNNA should have had someone posting on here and FatWallet, and calling every CE store screaming. Given their lack of response, it is hard to blame anyone but them - they were not even able to get their own staff (customer service and web design) in line with their new policy.


/carmi


----------



## icecow

At 10:00AM the 17th I would have turned my texas customer support people into a store informing crew. Give them a script that identifies them as representitives of ReplayTV and ask to speak to the manager. Introduce yourself, by name and get the managers name(write it down) Inform the manager to put a hold on selling replays..explain the situation.


Start with the numbers of the biggest cities and stores and go go go. Even if they didn't get to half of the stores, they would have been saving an average of $1000s a call.


some might laugh, but that's the first thing that I thought of that morning when I was wondering if it was a mistake or not.


cow


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by ZiggyGT_
*I see all of this is bad news for my subscription on my old unit. These guys just killed the new reformulated replay. the business model did not include this mess. When they go bankrupt no one will touch it. Our service is dead.*
It is very unlikely that DNNA will go bankrupt especially given D&M's financial strength. For that same reason, it unlikely that they will cease offering service right away even if they eliminate ReplayTv as a brand.

Quote:

*Perhaps CC, Compusa jumped the gun to dump the stock they thought they were going to be stuck with. They seized the mistake by Replay to dump all the stor stock. They know it is going nowhere.*
Even if this is true, ReplayTv's lack of response still leaves them primarily at fault.


/carmi


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by icecow_
*At 10:00AM the 17th I would have turned my texas customer support people into a store informing crew. Give them a script that identifies them as representitives of ReplayTV and ask to speak to the manager. Introduce yourself, by name and get the managers name(write it down) Inform the manager to put a hold on selling replays..explain the situation.*
Certainly a better response than doing nothing for several days. I think that they would have had to get permission from CC and RS management first, but it still would have been better.


/carmi


----------



## icecow

Well ya. I'd talk to Circuit City, TechDepot, Radioshack to begin with. I'm sure they would be 100% receptive but not modivated to call their own stores one by one. Ya just got to use some common sense and do it yourself instead of expect the retailers to start calling their own stores like banshees. It just doesnt sound like it would happen that way.


I'd try to get all the info from circuit city... list of phone numbers(public accessable anyway) List of biggest stores...


...


on another note. With the given that it was a stupid move, this thing hit ReplayTV at about the worst possible time...after they let go of all their staff (and just before christmas). Makes me wonder how many Texas CS they had employeed on that day Dec 17


cow


----------



## HiHoStevo

I was currently in the market for an upgraded PVR.... (I own a Replay 3030 & ShowStopper 2000).


I like the DirecTivo 2 as it records two programs at once. It also has better PQ than my 3xxx series replays as it has fewer Digital to Analog conversions.... it also records those shows in DD5.1 if they are broadcast that way. During my investigations I find retailers advertising the DirecTivo2 for $39 for new DTV customers (which I would be).


I am not thrilled with DTV, so I am still looking.............


I come upon a thread at AVS with about 6 posts (wow I never thought it would grow as it did), saying there is going to be a huge price drop on Replay 5xxx's tomorrow...., cool! I had to go by RS to pick up another AV connector, so I asked them what the "new" price on the 5040 model was?


$149.99.... way cool..... does that still come with the 3 years of subscription? Absolutely the RS manager says pointing at the sign stating 3 years of actvation then .99 a month!


Do you have any available? Yes sir, I have these two units that have been sitting here for the last 6 months and I would love to sell them.... sign me up I says!


Now from the perspective of a buyer who was considering buying a DirecTivo2 (that records two channels at the same time) with a 40 gig HD for $39 that only requires a $4.95 a month payment for as many as I have in my house.... Paying $149.99 for a Replay with 3 years of activation does not sound like a "steal!" However, I was familiar with Replay as I had owned two for several years... so I stayed "loyal" to the brand.


So did I skulk out of RS thinking I had "hoodwinked" someone? Absolutely NOT. I thought I had paid a "competitive" price for a PVR which would probably be overshadowed by a new model fairly soon.


A couple of days later I checked back and saw the little thread had grown to HUGE proportions!


I have read all of the arguments back and forth.... and I am not a lawyer and I do not know who "really" is to blame for this fiasco, but if what they have done is not a violation of several laws, it certainly should be.


Personally if my 5040's are turned off, I will follow the advice of one of the folks here and turn all the parties into my state AG's office..., then I will stop by the local court-house and file a small claims action. From what little experience I have with small claims I will wager I have a 99% chance of winning.


Steve


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by djMaxM_
*I kind of doubt that ReplayTV reads these boards at this point, but if they do, I have a proposal for what they coulda/shoulda/could still do.
*
This is getting off-topic but if Replay does not have a person whose job it is to read this board then they deserve to go out of business.


How often does a company have the opportunity to get this kind of real-time feedback to its products and the opportunity to interact with its target market - for free! Not to mention keeping tabs on any potential hacks and/or bugs.


In any case, if I worked at ReplayTV and it wasn't my job to read this I would certainly still be reading this forum in my spare time just because I would find it so interesting to hear real world comments. I would probably be biting my tongue half the time since it would be against company policy to post but I would definitely be lurking big-time. And to those from ReplayTV/DNNA reading this now - Hi There!


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by jmace57_
*But I'm pissed off enough now that I'll open the box, and I will try and activate it on Christmas. Then return it. Then the retailer (Tech Depot via Amazon) can take their lump on shipping and restocking charges...and Replay can have another "open box" that they have to discount in order to sell.*
Quote:

_Originally posted by rainbow_wahine_
*Maybe not....it goes back to RTV, gets reborn as a refurb and then gets sold for $359 (it is an 80 hour, right?) including lifetime activation. They still got more than what you paid for it.*
Yea but remember a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Right now they have these units in customers hands - the sale is complete. If they take it back as an open box then it has to be resold at a discount as a refurb. The person who buys that refurb could have paid full price for a new unit but because Replay will be flooding the market with these refurbs that will lower their sales of new units (assuming that the market for units is fairly non-elastic).


My point is this - a lot of people who may not have otherwise purchased DVR's probably bought replays both for themselves and as gifts because this appeared to be such a great deal. That means that Replay probably got product into the hands of people that wouldn't other have purchased a unit. I will conceed that short-term the effect would also reduce sales for a few months since a lot of people who were considering buying a Replay for full price probably jumped on this if they were quick enough. There is also the ebay effect and the market will have to absorb those units sold there until the supply runs out.


But I also think that people that get a replay now will likely stick with it in the future because they are used to it. That means newer models with greater features, HDTV support, etc. Once they have one in their homes, people that would never think of spending $500 or more on something that they think is a glorified VCR will come to understand why its worth that (and more) and will buy the next generation models when they come out. Granted its long-term thinking that most companies probably dont bother with anymore but I believe its true.


----------



## Markz2k

I submitted the whole fiasco to www.gripe2ed.com as well as www.theinquirer.net. Gripe Line has already posted a story on the matter as you can see here:
http://www.gripe2ed.com/scoop/story/...2/24/14241/702 


Word is starting to get out...


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by Markz2k_
*I submitted the whole fiasco to www.gripe2ed.com as well as www.theinquirer.net. Gripe Line has already posted a story on the matter as you can see here:
http://www.gripe2ed.com/scoop/story/...2/24/14241/702 


Word is starting to get out...*
Good job - Nice summary of the story.


----------



## kurhurdler

Quote:

_Originally posted by Markz2k_
*I submitted the whole fiasco to gripe2ed as well as theinquirer. Gripe Line has already posted a story on the matter as you can see here:



Word is starting to get out...*
Yes, very nice. Someone should post that to slashdot...org


----------



## JWeavis

The local CompUSA still had the 40 and 80 hour ones marked $499 and $599. Nothing stating the new price change or the new service policy.


----------



## NearlyGod

Quote:

_Originally posted by kurhurdler_
*Yes, very nice. Someone should post that to slashdot...org*
Speaking of Slashdot, they have a story about this years CES and they talk about a HDTV DirecTivo. So all of us ex-ReplayTV faithful may have a new device to replace our current RTV units with.


----------



## winter

Quote:

_Originally posted by JWeavis_
*The local CompUSA still had the 40 and 80 hour ones marked $499 and $599. Nothing stating the new price change or the new service policy.*
I bet if you bring it up to the register it rings up at $150 - at least thats what others have reported.


----------



## Markz2k

I'm wondering something else. Is there any chance that executives at D&M Holding corp are still in the dark on this? Maybe the official response came only from DNNA, and they still don't know what their unit is doing to their good name.


The press release from DNNA mentions D&M and also mentions the Denon, Marantz, and McIntosh brands. As more articles are written about the whole fiasco, isn't it possible that consumers will start to associate the high-end audio brands with the company that tried to screw them over on a ReplayTV unit?


Seems like D&M is taking an awfully big risk here by being such a hard-ass on the whole issue. Especially when they will likely lose if it gets to a court.


Well, it should certainly be interesting to see how it unfolds, anyway.


----------



## brian7972

The breadth of the confusion:

Quote:

The Wall St Journal reports on some of the challenges facing Tivo. Pricing pressure is getting more intense. *Yesterday, ReplayTV lowered the price on its cheapest machine to $149 and stopped forcing consumers to buy three years of service upfront, cutting the initial cost by more than $300.*

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/tic...223&ID=3236418


----------



## NearlyGod

Now this I find extremely interesting? Where did they get their info from? Another press release?


----------



## brian7972

I don't like to cut and paste articles from sites, but you can find the entire article cut and pasted in this thread (about another topic):

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb...hreadid=149747 

Quote:

Monday, ReplayTV lowered the price on its cheapest machine to $149 and stopped forcing consumers to buy three years of service upfront, cutting the initial cost by more than $300.


----------



## brian7972

Parsing through the quote more closely, and playing devil's advocate, this statement is correct: "stopped forcing consumers to buy three years of service upfront."


That's indeed true. You have a week or two to pay for the service after you pay the $149.99. 


(Of course, the "cutting the initial cost by $300" is similarly true at the POS.) But, it's still incorrect in the grand scheme of things and highly misleading (not WSJ's fault).


----------



## seidelhd

So, I missed out on the "firesale"/mistake, and while I initially kicked myself for not running over to CC, I'm kinda glad I don't have to deal with the feelings of anger and betrayal. However, I AM looking forward to all the refurb units that will be flooding the market in about a month or two. By that time, I'll have decided if the Comcast DVR is worth keeping or not and whether to get one of the open-box units that everyone will be returning next week.


----------



## s.bradford

Quote:

_Originally posted by tedler_
*So there it is....they are officially blaming the retailers... ha!*
This is disappointing, and I doubt the retailers were responsible.


I was a retail manager for Egghead back in their hay day almost 20 years ago. over 200 stores were corporate owned like CompUSA and CC... and when directives such as this came down from corporate they were followed to the letter immediately by all stores.


Now I can't speak for RS as the stores in my areas are franchised (so their management could be a little off the mark), but I feel it is impossible for both CC and CompUSA to consistently screw this up unless DNNA was responsible tor the communication f**kup.


----------



## Zwingle

This is unofficial.....BUT, according to a phone call to RTV cust scv(India) just a few minutes ago.......


They told me that all units that are activated will stay activated for the 3 years, and then will be offered the option to go monthly for the monthly price that the service will be at that time (3 years later) or the Lifetime price whatever that may be at the time. Like I said, this is unofficial, only because we have gotten the wrong stories form the reps before. All units that have were bought but not activated before the 23rd, will have to get the subcription for either monthly or the Lifetime. The only reason they will be doing this is because they cannot blanket deactivate all the units, because they have no way of knowing which were bought at what price. They will deal with the few that actually bought at the old price when they call to activate, as those phone calls should be fewer. If you are confused....sorry...reread what I said....it may make sense


----------



## Selma Bouvier

Quote:

Parsing through the quote more closely, and playing devil's advocate, this statement is correct: "stopped forcing consumers to buy three years of service upfront."


That's indeed true. You have a week or two to pay for the service after you pay the $149.99.


(Of course, the "cutting the initial cost by $300" is similarly true at the POS.) But, it's still incorrect in the grand scheme of things and highly misleading (not WSJ's fault).
Well, in a way, yes, but there is a real difference. There were lots of complaints here in NYC when the subway fare went up to $2 a ride even though the monthly unlimited card went up by a much smaller percentage. Sure, people paying to go to work daily would now pay $80+ a month but they could get unlimited service for a flat $70 including any other rides for shopping, appointments, entertainment, etc. But lots of people just can't pay that $70 all at once.


Of course the working poor and people enjoying DVR's are not exactly the same demographic, but my point is that unlike most people on this board, there are a lot of people who are more able to pay $12.95 a month than $299 all at once, even if it costs them money in the long run. Going to the opposite extreme, it's a lot cheaper to buy a house for cash but most people take out mortgages, vastly increasing their costs because they just don't have that money upfront. This lets J6P into the world of DVR and I think that's a good thing.


----------



## rad

That's the first thing that I've seen that makes sense.


----------



## majortom

Quote:

_Originally posted by Selma Bouvier_
*Going to the opposite extreme, it's a lot cheaper to buy a house for cash but most people take out mortgages, vastly increasing their costs because they just don't have that money upfront. This lets J6P into the world of DVR and I think that's a good thing.*
Actually, for many people it is not cheaper to pay cash. Thanks to tax-free interest on mortgage loans, it is often cheaper to borrow than it is to pay cash. It just depends on what rate of return one can get for that money _vs._ what interest rate one pays.


/carmi


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by winter_
*Yea but remember a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Right now they have these units in customers hands - the sale is complete. If they take it back as an open box then it has to be resold at a discount as a refurb.*
The problem is in my opinion granting service to these lower-priced boxes doesn't really buy them anything either:


(not making any excuses or defenses, just providing my own take on the rationale)


1. Replay didn't make any money on those boxes. It is generally accepted that Replay loses money on the box sales, but makes a profit after the subscription fees are paid. Not breaks even on the boxes, loses money.


2. Even taking it back and selling it as a discounted refurb actually probably would make them money, or allow them to break even.


3. Customers who might have even got them for $149 with the service included would not be very good word-of-mouth people: "How much was it? Well, mine was $149, but you'll have to pay $450." Which leaves both those customers thinking "I'll just wait until the price drops some more".


4. There would likely be no additional revenue from these customers. The service plans went to lifetime, and people who buy only because they get amazing deals tend not to buy those items at full price. While it's possible that some of these people *might* have bought second Replays for networking in the home, the percentage of 2+ Replay households in the Replay-owning universe is small, I believe.


5. The number of people affected in this whole mess is infinitesimal in the world of "still don't own a PVR but might buy one some day", even considering word of mouth. In six months, if the ReplayTV is the better product, people are less likely to be swayed by some screwup months before. This is a blip: some will argue that it falls in a pattern of screwups (calling toots, calling toots), but since the only thing in common over these years was the product name (one name, three owners) it's a hard argument to make.


In the end, there are thousands and thousands of ReplayTV owners who paid full price for their units and are still thrilled with them. After I had stopped recommending ReplayTV to my friends and family for a period of time (starting with last Christmas's fiasco when all of Sonicblue's customer service became unreachable), I have begun recommending them again heartily, and my friends are buying. This incidence doesn't change anything for me, because obviously my opinions are somewhere in the middle (I think Replay would have been better off in the short-term honoring the service, but I completely understand why they chose not to). Most of us, when asked what PVR to buy, will consider the person asking the question and give them a fair evaluation for them, not for me. That may legitimately include a lack of trust of Replay, but if that's your only factor, just consider if that's fair for the person who's buying...


----------



## NearlyGod

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*


5. The number of people affected in this whole mess is infinitesimal in the world of "still don't own a PVR but might buy one some day", even considering word of mouth. In six months, if the ReplayTV is the better product, people are less likely to be swayed by some screwup months before. This is a blip: some will argue that it falls in a pattern of screwups (calling toots, calling toots), but since the only thing in common over these years was the product name (one name, three owners) it's a hard argument to make.
*
You mention that you don't think that these incidents can be considered a pattern because the owners are different. That may be, but are the people in charge of the ReplayTv division different as well? I am asking because I am curious. I have seen companies change hands several times where many of the top brass are retained from move to move. IS this the case at RTV or is it truely being run by different people?


----------



## BaysideBas

Justin, you should change your AVS member designation to "The Voice of Reason and Moderator"


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by s.bradford_
*This is disappointing, and I doubt the retailers were responsible.


I was a retail manager for Egghead back in their hay day almost 20 years ago. over 200 stores were corporate owned like CompUSA and CC... and when directives such as this came down from corporate they were followed to the letter immediately by all stores.


Now I can't speak for RS as the stores in my areas are franchised (so their management could be a little off the mark), but I feel it is impossible for both CC and CompUSA to consistently screw this up unless DNNA was responsible tor the communication f**kup.*
Your retail experience is the same as mine, although in 3 different stores across 2 states.


Maybe this is why I too fell that this directive MUST have come from DNNA.


----------



## Jeff D

Wow, I've had no less than 10 posts here directed at Justin and not one has got a response.... that alone is intersting enough for me to scan back over 20 pages of text.


----------



## millwood

DNNA is doomed either way.


If they stood their course, I am sure there will be enough angry receivers of christmas "gifts" who suddened found out that they had to pay big money to use the "gifts"; the owners will claim false advertising and bait-and-switch against either DNNA or the retailers; the FTC / states AGs would be interested in hearing a case that has this kind of publicity to promote their own political careers; the retailers who got to deal with the returns and angry customers would be crazy to carry products from a manufacturer that is no badly managed and gives no damn about their "partners" in retailing. so even if DNNA survived this fiasco, they would be considerably weakened in the market place and have limited distribution capabilities.


not to mention the lawyers, 


If DNNA reversed course admitting their fault (the right thing to do). They are facing massive losses because the hardware is subsidized by the subscription; the retailers would be very cautious dealing with them going forward knowing how they had behaved here; and any future customers will look at the bargains people are getting and ask themselves why they should pay more.


The future of DVRs as standalone devices is dubious at best. and competition is intense: Tivo certainly is kicking RPTV's rear-end, and cablebox makers / service providers are integrating DVRs into their devices to differentiate themselves. I thought RPTV's best hope is to find a partener there and live off their IP.


Seeing how RPTV poorly executed this simple "pricing adjustment" and treated their parteners, who in his right mind would engage RPTV for anything remotely more complicated than this?


None.


so eitherway, DNNA is facing significant financial losses and reputational damages. D&M is owned by a financial investor and I don't think they would appreciate owning a 2nd rate business that is sucking cash away.


----------



## inkspoof

Saw this in FW...

Quote:

Ditto to above...


This is unofficial.....BUT, according to a phone call to RTV cust scv(India) just a few minutes ago.......


They told me that all units that are activated will stay activated for the 3 years, and then will be offered the option to go monthly for the monthly price that the service will be at that time (3 years later) or the Lifetime price whatever that may be at the time. Like I said, this is unofficial, only because we have gotten the wrong stories form the reps before. All units that have were bought but not activated before the 23rd, will have to get the subcription for either monthly or the Lifetime. The only reason they will be doing this is because they cannot blanket deactivate all the units, because they have no way of knowing which were bought at what price. They will deal with the few that actually bought at the old price when they call to activate, as those phone calls should be fewer. If you are confused....sorry...reread what I said....it may make sense


----------



## sphereman

sorry for my ignorance but what is the deal now? I've quit reading this thread about 3 days ago and looks like the dust hasn't settled yet?


One guy over at anandtech said the units must be activated by today for 3 year subscription. Is this correct? or the guy does not have a clue what he is talking about (talking about the ones from CC)..


Anyways.. happy holidays!!


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by Jeff D_
*Justin's bad example... 5504 is still THIS year's model. The 5500 line was released THREE months ago. This does not constitute "next year" or "last year's model". The pricing plan started with the 5500 that was released in September, 3 year activation was included. Remember your "demo days" training? I do.

...


I know you said you aren't defending DNNA, but a lot of your comments sound that way.
*
It's possible that I sound like that simply because I'm trying to provide an alternate viewpoint around here. I don't make any judgments on the rightness or wrongness of Replay's actions, because, quite frankly, I don't have a dog in the hunt.


Yes, there's a part of me that says "your short-term gain may make the company less stable for me in the long-term", but I don't really believe that fully. Like I've said in other posts, I think this is a blip - AVS Forum and other internet sites do a terrific job of magnifying problems to appear massive, when in reality they can be small. I don't think this issue is insignificant to the company, but I don't think it will make or break them.


Also, my experiences when I called around to verify the stories I was hearing set my tone somewhat: Stopping by a Radio Shack in my area, I was clearly told that, despite the note on the device, that service activation was separate. When I called a couple of Circuit City stores in my area, I was told the units were $149 and required activation. To me, this said that there were quite a few aware in the sales chain that knew what was going on. I understand my experiences were different than others. However, I'm not sure that others accept the fact that there are people who were clearly told activation was not included, yet are still indignant. And maybe that's the sad part: It's my opinion the rabidness of people who tried to take advantage of the situation here probably ruined it for the people who were legitimately confused. Again, just my opinion, and I understand that had Replay acted more quickly, this problem might have been averted.


However, the speed with which the units disappeared off the shelves in most location I think precludes Replay from having a chance at all to have head this off once it started. I heard last night from one user who wanted to remain anonymous that Circuit City received well over 1,000 web orders in the first 12 hours after the price change. Now, after processing just a few, they realized the problem and notified the rest of the orders that activation was not included. I find it interesting that CircuitCity.com was able to put the brakes on, but the stores were not. It's possible that most of the units were gone from the stores in that time too. But either way, if Circuit City couldn't figure it out, I'm not sure how Replay could have jumped in in time. Again, my opinion.


And Jeff, your question about my opinions of the management at Replay: At the moment, many of the people who were there that I knew are now gone, so I can't render much of an opinion on who is there. I spent a lot of time talking with a lot of people there in the last year, and found them to be intelligent people who were committed to the platform. I think we all were aware of the challenges that they faced, and while I think they had a lot of successes (the 5.1 software, dramatic improvements in the web site, getting the units back into the retail chain) apparently there were a number of things that didn't quite pan out. As for the current direction, except for this terrible transition, I think the new pricing scheme is exactly what was needed and I'm glad to see it implemented. It will be interesting to see if Richard's move to Rio and other staff movements with Escient will mean more integration of ReplayTV with the other arms of DNNA (which is something we've all been asking for).


What I can say is that, despite what a lot of people think, Replay regularly takes direct input from this forum. They can't always just do what is asked, but they do listen.


----------



## BeefStu

Quote:

_Originally posted by winter_
*Yea but remember a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Right now they have these units in customers hands - the sale is complete. If they take it back as an open box then it has to be resold at a discount as a refurb. The person who buys that refurb could have paid full price for a new unit but because Replay will be flooding the market with these refurbs that will lower their sales of new units (assuming that the market for units is fairly non-elastic).*
There is no way to apply that logic to this situation and I don't know why so many people are finding this so hard to grasp. Letting these $149 units remain activated loses DNNA *$299 a pop* and in addition, they are guaranteed *absolutely no future business*. Even if they have to send all these units through a refurb process, DNNA only stands to lose $50-75 (guessing) per unit, which by my math is a heckuva lot better than losing $299.


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by sphereman_
*One guy over at anandtech said the units must be activated by today for 3 year subscription. Is this correct? or the guy does not have a clue what he is talking about (talking about the ones from CC)..*
The official line from Replay is that if you pay $149 for a 5504 (or $299 for an 80 hour unit), it does not include service activation: Unless you paid $499 for the 5504 (or 5040s from Radio Shack), service wasn't bundled.


If anyone else tells you different, don't trust them. It may work out in the end for you, but it just as well may not.


----------



## sphereman

Quote:

_Originally posted by BeefStu_
*There is no way to apply that logic to this situation and I don't know why so many people are finding this so hard to grasp. Letting these $149 units remain activated loses DNNA $299 a pop and in addition, they are guaranteed absolutely no future business. Even if they have to send all these units through a refurb process, DNNA only stands to lose $50-75 (guessing) per unit, which by my math is a heckuva lot better than losing $299.*
NO NO NO. why do you think they will lose 299 a pop? they've already spent lots of money and established their service. 299 people pay for subscription at this point is more than likely pure profit! even if they let us have the 3 year subscription at no extra cost, they are NOT losing all 299 dollars a pop. whereas as you guessed, 50-75 loss per unit being returned and sold as refurbished will hurt them BIG TIME!! Among those who returned their replayTV and got pissed, how many do you think will buy a replayTV and pay for subscription?? FEW at most!!


----------



## BeefStu

Quote:

_Originally posted by tluxon_ DNNA - if you check back on my posts since 12/17, you will see that I was one of your staunchest defenders. Well, no more. You should be ashamed of yourselves. This whole matter has been handled in a most subversive and devious manner. You act like you didn't know anything was wrong until you made your announcement nearly a week later. This is inexcusable! You have not been forthcoming and unless you were DEAD you've known about this issue from the start. If you don't exercise a little LEADERSHIP and apologize publicly with press releases and explain why you let this go for almost an entire week, I will NOT recommend ANY of your products to ANYONE!!! [/b]
I wouldn't hold my breath, and I'd hope that the drama dies down in a week or two as you remember that ReplayTV is still the best DVR on the market.


(not directed at tluxon) Speaking of which, could we create a separate thread for all the sour-grapers talking about things like lawsuits, service theft (e.g. "I paid $499 but lost my receipt"),etc.? It's been an entire week since the _$149 Attack of the Noobs_ started, and I'd love to see all of this stuff moved offline like the Gulf War II threads earlier this year so more useful topics can bubble back up. Either that or send everyone over to FatWallet where there are thousands of like-minded individuals who are used to supporting each other through episodes of _dealus denialus_.


----------



## sphereman

oh. one more thing to add..


if DNNA doesn't bite the bullit this time, my prediction is they will never COME BACK..


----------



## jleavens

Another week or two, and I predict we will be flooded with "how do I upgrade my 5040" and "how do I use DVArchive?" threads again.


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by sphereman_
*NO NO NO. why do you think they will lose 299 a pop? they've already spent lots of money and established their service. 299 people pay for subscription at this point is more than likely pure profit! even if they let us have the 3 year subscription at no extra cost, they are NOT losing all 299 dollars a pop. whereas as you guessed, 50-75 loss per unit being returned and sold as refurbished will hurt them BIG TIME!! Among those who returned their replayTV and got pissed, how many do you think will buy a replayTV and pay for subscription?? FEW at most!!*
The point being made, again, is that it is generally agreed that ReplayTV does not break even on the sale of the hardware, it loses money until the subscription fees are paid. So if Replay only gets its cut of the $149 paid at retail, every one of those boxes is a loss of dollars to Replay, and with lifetime subscriptions attached to the box, no hope of additional revenue, just an obligation to provide service to the box.


----------



## Jeff D

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*Another week or two, and I predict we will be flooded with "how do I upgrade my 5040" and "how do I use DVArchive?" threads again. *
I suspect this thread will have 50 pages by then.


----------



## sphereman

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*The point being made, again, is that it is generally agreed that ReplayTV does not break even on the sale of the hardware, it loses money until the subscription fees are paid. So if Replay only gets its cut of the $149 paid at retail, every one of those boxes is a loss of dollars to Replay, and with lifetime subscriptions attached to the box, no hope of additional revenue, just an obligation to provide service to the box.*
EXACTLY. Replay is losing money either way. I am saying if replay chooses to have the units returned... that is $50-75 per pop like the other guy said. If they choose to provide service at no extra cost for 3 years (no life time), would that still be $50-75 loss a pop?? I don't think so. How much would it cost them to provide already-established "TV-guide" service through internet to replay users? a little more bandwitdth, I'd say.


PLUS where there are more users outthere, more people will recomend the service to one another, more people will buy (hopefully pay full price for the sub at that time), more revenue for Replay!


----------



## millwood

Quote:

_Originally posted by sphereman_
*If they choose to provide service at no extra cost for 3 years (no life time), would that still be $50-75 loss a pop?? I don't think so.*
I agree with you. The marginal cost of providing services to one additional customer is minimal, if not zero.


the biggest loss, in my view, is that they may have lost a potential customer who may down the road pay for the service if not for this incredibly good deal.


But I was actually surprised by RPTV's reaction as I think they made the wrong decision.


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by sphereman_
*EXACTLY. Replay is losing money either way. I am saying if replay chooses to have the units returned... that is $50-75 per pop like the other guy said. If they choose to provide service at no extra cost for 3 years (no life time), would that still be $50-75 loss a pop?? I don't think so. How much would it cost them to provide already-established "TV-guide" service through internet to replay users? a little more bandwitdth, I'd say.*
Not exactly:


You are correct in that the actual costs to provide "service" to the boxes is nowhere near $300. Essentially we've seen between Replay and TiVo that if you want to sell a PVR that has no service costs, you need to sell it at roughly $450 to stay in business. The $149 + $X/month is simply a way to lower the price entry barrier, but in the end you're still paying the full price. If the box goes out at $150 flat, you've lost money on that sale, probably at least $200 per box. (no, don't go print out a parts list and tell me it can be built for $136, there are a lot more than parts that go into each box).


There are cases like DirecTiVos where they can get away with lower pricing. But that is because those units are then being subsidized by DirecTV and their subscription fees.


----------



## tluxon

Quote:

_Originally posted by BeefStu_
*I wouldn't hold my breath, and I'd hope that the drama dies down in a week or two as you remember that ReplayTV is still the best DVR on the market.*
Oh, I totally agree with you. The last thing I would expect at this time would be for DNNA to step up and apologize for not being forthcoming about this situation early on the 17th. It would be inconsistent with their track record .


There's no question in my mind that ReplayTV is still the best DVR in the market right now. I've paid full price for 3 of them with lifetime and would've paid considerably more considering that there's no competitive product that gives me the flexibility that Replay does. But that's hardly to DNNA's credit - they don't get the benefit of the doubt with me anymore after allowing this situation to fester the way that it did.


I'm really glad to see them offer a continuance on the 3 years service because once people settle in to using these things, it's really tough to resist the features that are enabled for multiple Replays. They may disagree now with their emotions, but many people will feel like it's worth it to pay the asking price for another one of these puppies to get the increased functionality (not to mention conflict management, which is best handled with more DVRs).


I've seen many people complain that their present Replay(s) "will be obsolete in 3 years, so who needs lifetime?". One of the main things that could go wrong with these things (other than losing support, which I doubt will happen) is a failed hard drive. Well, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to pop a new one in and get a lot of "bonus time" out of it. I think that after 3 years of service, many of these bargain finders will start shelling out $12.95/month, which will help ease DNNA's pain a lot.


And you and Justin are right - these boards have a way of exaggerating the true magnitude of an issue like this and most people that are looking for a DVR in a few months will not be aware of or care about this incident. Oh sure, there are a few of us that are passionate enough right now to remind them if they ask, but we are very few, and unless something really goes haywire with the functionality of the Replay, it will remain one of the best alternatives even without HDTV capability.


Tim


----------



## SteveWinNJ

Just a reply for those folks who bought 50xx's in the last few months and have yet to activate them.


I picked up a 5060 for my folks for a Christmas gift about three months ago, and I planned on activating it on Saturday when I go to visit. I purchased the unit with the understanding that the additional cost would be $9.99 monthly or $250 lifetime. Because I waited to activate until now, I am now told by customer service that I must pay $299 or $12.95 per month. The CR agent asked me how much I paid for the unit, which I didn't exactly recall. I did tell him that it did not come activated though.


If someone else has a different experience with customer service trying to activate a 50xx unit, please advise.


----------



## allaboutmojo

I read on this forum that some units have been de-activated already. How can one tell is your unit has been De-Activated? Does the unit stop working completely or does the guide stop getting updating or do dialups stop getting through?


Please provide detials on how to check if the unit is activated...in stepo by step so those who are not as familiar with ReplAYtv or have units that seem to be working/activated know if we should return or keep becasue we made the cutoff.


So far I just keep checking under MENU - SYSTEM INFO and confirm the previous connection (last night) occured).


Thanks


----------



## Zwingle

If they truly have unbundled the service from the units, then why are they still offering the refurbs for the old higher price and 3 years of service. This is just more proof they screwed up in my opinon. Shouldn't they have lowered the refurb prices accordingly to reflect the new unbundled pricing change?


----------



## telamon

Quote:

_Originally posted by BigJDurango_
*I read on this forum that some units have been de-activated already. How can one tell is your unit has been De-Activated? Does the unit stop working completely or does the guide stop getting updating or do dialups stop getting through?


Please provide detials on how to check if the unit is activated...in stepo by step so those who are not as familiar with ReplAYtv or have units that seem to be working/activated know if we should return or keep becasue we made the cutoff.


So far I just keep checking under MENU - SYSTEM INFO and confirm the previous connection (last night) occured).


Thanks*
If you have been deactivated and are out of the grace period, then you should get a message telling you that you must activate as soon as you turn on the unit.


To see if you are deactivated but in a grace period, do Menu->Setup->System Information and look at the Service line. If it says grace period, then you are in a grace period. You should also be getting activation reminder messages whenever you pull up the Replay or Channel guides.


----------



## abreuma

When the ReplayTV website finally mentioned this mess and their position on it I decided to return my 5504 to Circuit City today. I'm not upset with either ReplayTV or Circuit City because I haven't lost anything in a gamble to get a good deal on a PVR. I would have been upset if I had actually run the cat-5 I was planning to run or had ordered some wireless network gear but I didn't get that far.


I think these PVRs are cool gadgets but they're priced too high for simply recording TV. ReplayTV's monthly service would be about half of what I pay for cable and frankly I don't think it'll ever be worth $13 a month to me. However if ReplayTV had thrown the green sticker people some kind of bone I may have given it a shot. For example, if they had offered lifetime service for something less than $299 or monthly service under $10 a month I would have probably kept the unit. I would rather pay more for the hardware and less for the service.


There's still a plus in this mess for me - I found this website and it's got some really good stuff.


----------



## allaboutmojo

So if one is not getting the Not Active Screen and the unit is working properly then all is OK and activated...for now.


When can one assume that all is OK and will remain OK??? 1/1/04....or 1/15/04 or ???


----------



## gweempose

Looks like yours may have slipped through the cracks.


----------



## telamon

Quote:

_Originally posted by BigJDurango_
*So if one is not getting the Not Active Screen and the unit is working properly then all is OK and activated...for now.


When can one assume that all is OK and will remain OK??? 1/1/04....or 1/15/04 or ???*
What unit do you have?


----------



## allaboutmojo

I have two 5504 models.


anyone know what date one can consider themesleves safe or lucky?


----------



## SeeSpotRun

So now that a few days have passed and the dust has started to settle a little bit, I thought I would post a follow up comment on my situation.


Quick recap: Iâ€™m one of those evil FatWallet folks who heard about the Replay price drop early on. (I found the AVS Forum though FatWallet and Iâ€™m a new person here at AVS.) When I went out and got a 5040 and a 5504 and I really did think that service was included with those units. At the time I went out all I knew was that these were old models with the smallest hard drives and that the price had been dropped on them. That looked like they were on clearance to me. I had no idea that the larger units also had price drops or what the service cost. I had seen reports of people calling in and being told they included service and everything I saw said it included service.


So now Iâ€™ve had a chance to use my 5040 and I really like it. It did take a bit of an adjustment getting used to the concept of watching TV because there was a show I wanted to see versus having the TV on to make the time go by faster. Also, I love that commercial skip feature. The problem I see with it is that there is no longer a clear time to go up to get snacks or hit the bathroom. I am left to make that decision on my own as to when I want to hit pause. I donâ€™t know if my unit is going to keep itâ€™s activation or not. When it phoned home the activation turned from one time paid to having a grace period.


In the end, if I donâ€™t get included service for my unit, I am going to keep it but probably pay them monthly. I did read the thread of monthly versus lifetime but I have a big concern that the lifetime in question may be DNNA supplying service for the Replay and not how ever long my unit continues to work. Of course Iâ€™d rather be paying them the 10 a month under the old plan instead of the current 13.


Now I see all sorts of bickering about what DNNA should do about the situation and how much they will lose on these systems because they didnâ€™t get their $299. If a unit gets free activation, DNNA did not lose $299. They lost what ever the difference between their cost of a 5xxx unit plus the cost of servicing that unit for 3 years is, minus what ever they sold the unit for and Iâ€™m sure that number is a lot less than $299. The remainder of the $299 is the profit they would have made but now will not. To put it another way, if you sell something at cost, you did not lose anything, you broke even. While you did not gain any profit, you did not suffer a loss. The only way you could claim it as even a theoretical loss is if there were no more units to sell (and they can always make more) or if you claim that now that a consumer have a unit, they wonâ€™t buy one (and that assumes that they would have bought one in the first place). Once you compute how much the actual loss is, you would have to compare it to how much it is going cost when a unit gets returned plus the cost of being reconditioned. I suspect that it is probably pretty close either way and by DNNA taking the stance they have so far, I think they only created ill will for everyone and probably increased their losses (extra CSR calls, extra 800 bills, lots of returns and so on).


I never did open the 5504 because I was waiting to see how the whole situation was going to work out. Sure, who knew that if you quickly plugged the thing in that you would likely get to keep the service. That box clearly said 3 years of service included and I think they should honor it. It isnâ€™t my fault that someone messed up and I think that I should not be held responsible. I still think it is likely that they will be held to providing service on those units.


Overall, I am pretty disappointed in how this whole thing was handled by DNNA. I want the company to succeed (donâ€™t want to be stuck with a door stop). However I do have some animosity towards them, some disappointment in them and how this whole thing played out.


That said, here is my likely net outcome: The 5040 kept (and only because of the internet sharing and the commercial skip), the 5505 held until the last day to be returned and then returned if not activated (no need to keep it, in the future I can either get a good deal on an open box / refurb 5505 or a better model in the future if I decide to forgive and forget). Given that Iâ€™m so impressed with DVarchive and was disappointed in the high bandwidth requirements (so no 802.11b), I no longer feel that having one for each TV is practical or necessary. I might pop for a second unit because I could run cat5 cable if necessary but I am not getting a third for sure. As for the possible 4th unit, my sister bought a 5505 that she is keeping and the Tivo is getting returned. If she doesnâ€™t get service on her Green Stickered unit then she is also going to sign up for the monthly plan as it is the same price as the Tivo. If DNNA makes some sort of reduced lifetime fee offer to her, she would likely take them up on it.


As for getting other people to buy Replay units based on word of mouthâ€¦ I have told a few people about the PVR concept and that the Replay units have some cool features versus the Tivo, the reaction is always the sameâ€¦ They just donâ€™t get it. That leads me to think that the majority of people are not going to buy these things at any price unless they understand why they want one. To understand that, people really need to try them out and use them for a little while later. Eventually those people I tried to convert will come over to my house and I think that once they get to play with it, it is possible they will understand then. One suggestion I have for DNNA (are you listening) is to have some sort of grace period for activation / subscription (say 30 days) so that people can try these things out while they are still in their return period. The only problem I see is that when they go back to the store, you need to reset the 30 day count and that could be handled by a quick phone call from the store.


SeeSpotRun


----------



## telamon

Quote:

_Originally posted by BigJDurango_
*I have two 5504 models.


anyone know what date one can consider themesleves safe or lucky?*
No one knows at this point. There is a report from Zwingle that a CSR told him that 55xx's net connected for the first time between 12/17 and late 12/21 will get three years of service and then be subject to the normal pricing plans thereafter (normal meaning NOT the special $0.99/month) . Seems they can't tell the difference between old price and new price net connected units during that time period.


No idea if the CSR knew what he was talking about or mixing up facts.


----------



## rainbow_wahine

Quote:

_Originally posted by telamon_
*No one knows at this point. There is a report from Zwingle that a CSR told him that 55xx's net connected for the first time between 12/17 and late 12/21 will get three years of service and then be subject to the normal pricing plans thereafter (normal meaning NOT the special $0.99/month) . Seems they can't tell the difference between old price and new price net connected units during that time period.


No idea if the CSR knew what he was talking about or mixing up facts.*
If they can't figure out who paid what now, how will they determine that then? I mean 3 years is a long time, but.........


----------



## bobo809

I have contacted the NBC10 station in Philly about this. The consumer alert producer wrote me back and wanted to follow up the story. If someone is interested to appear on camera with the unit and packaging, please write me back. PM me.


----------



## millwood

Quote:

_Originally posted by telamon_
*No idea if the CSR knew what he was talking about or mixing up facts.*
I would put that right up there as evidence of how seriously confused rptv was / is: their own agents / employees don't even know what's going on. How can such a company realistically expect its customers / retailers to know what's going on inside of that company?


To me, anyone who has called and got confirmation that their $150 units included free services has done his/her due diligence and should expect the rptv to perform the contract and deliver the service that was promised on the box, in the box, by their agents / CSR, and on their very own website.


If we couldnot rely on any of this, how would we expect commerce to be reasonably conducted?


----------



## Markz2k

The article that was posted at GripeLine ( www.gripe2ed.com ) has also been posted on InfoWorld . Comments can be made at both sites; the Gripeline site already has several.


----------



## KenC29

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*The problem is in my opinion granting service to these lower-priced boxes doesn't really buy them anything either:


(not making any excuses or defenses, just providing my own take on the rationale)


1. Replay didn't make any money on those boxes. It is generally accepted that Replay loses money on the box sales, but makes a profit after the subscription fees are paid. Not breaks even on the boxes, loses money.*
Yes, and they have to weigh the potential bad press and publicity, the potential for a class-action lawsuit by the litigious-minded, the potential for worsened relations with the retail channel who are now going to get alot of returns, etc. These also have financial implications for Replay, which must be weighed against the cost of some type of compromise with the affected customers.


And, as you note, the cost of the programming service is a fraction of what they charge, that's how they make up the cost of selling the box. A possible compromise would be to offer the affected customers a subscription at or near cost, and write it off as a lesson learned in customer relations.

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*2. Even taking it back and selling it as a discounted refurb actually probably would make them money, or allow them to break even.*
Well, what's the cost of taking the item back, and recertifying it as a refurb? $100? Why not do what litigants do, figure out what the refurb process cost is, and then just offer that to the affected customers as a discount. If the refurb process costs $100, then just offer a $100 off the subscription. If you do that, then the cost to Replay is the same, it's $100, but you garner good-will.

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*3. Customers who might have even got them for $149 with the service included would not be very good word-of-mouth people: "How much was it? Well, mine was $149, but you'll have to pay $450." Which leaves both those customers thinking "I'll just wait until the price drops some more".*
Hardly the case, seeing as you've forgotten the new pricing model. The more likely answer is I got it for $149 thru a pricing snafu, with service, but you'll have to pay $149, and then the service will cost you $xx per month. As far as word-of-mouth goes, isn't it mostly about how great the service is, and well worth every cent?

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*4. There would likely be no additional revenue from these customers. The service plans went to lifetime, and people who buy only because they get amazing deals tend not to buy those items at full price. While it's possible that some of these people *might* have bought second Replays for networking in the home, the percentage of 2+ Replay households in the Replay-owning universe is small, I believe.*
You're generalizing. Are you saying that buying one Replay doesn't lead to buying another? I thought that was one of its big selling points, the advantage of networking, and if it's a feature that isn't generating sales, then clearly Replay should have been investing its time developing other more compelling features that might actually drive more sales.


NOT everyone who bought, was a FatWallet or other type of obsessive bargain hunter. I have posted several times, I just happened into my local RS to look at the radio control cars for my nephews, saw the Replays on sale, and decided to take the plunge. didn't see any info on this deal at FatWallet or here, or anywhere. Why haven't I purchased a Replay before? I have a DVR attached to my Mac, so I've never felt the need to buy one, but I've mentioned to my siblings that they ought to consider one as they are less computer adept.

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*5. The number of people affected in this whole mess is infinitesimal in the world of "still don't own a PVR but might buy one some day", even considering word of mouth. In six months, if the ReplayTV is the better product, people are less likely to be swayed by some screwup months before. This is a blip: some will argue that it falls in a pattern of screwups (calling toots, calling toots), but since the only thing in common over these years was the product name (one name, three owners) it's a hard argument to make.*
Now, this is infuriating. No matter how infinitesimal, the idea that ignoring even one customer is what destroys companies.


According to the WSJ, about 3million homes have DVRs, with half from their service provider, the rest split between Tivo and Replay. How many is that for Replay? Can they really piss off thousands of potential customers? Is it really that infinitesimal? Giving the impression that even one customer is inconsequential is really the wrong way to conduct a successful business model.


While you may say this screwup won't matter in 6 months, you need to look at what happened. THIS management screwed up the pricing change so that some of the largest electronics stores in the country got "confused"!?! If they can do it once, don't you think Replay can do it again? And, do you think they handled the snafu well, in a timely manner? Didn't they get notified by the retail chain that something was wrong on the first day, and figure it out quickly enough to stop the confusion shortly thereafter? Why are you so confident that management can keep their noses clean after such a bungle?

Quote:

_Originally posted by jleavens_
*In the end, there are thousands and thousands of ReplayTV owners who paid full price for their units and are still thrilled with them. After I had stopped recommending ReplayTV to my friends and family for a period of time (starting with last Christmas's fiasco when all of Sonicblue's customer service became unreachable), I have begun recommending them again heartily, and my friends are buying. This incidence doesn't change anything for me, because obviously my opinions are somewhere in the middle (I think Replay would have been better off in the short-term honoring the service, but I completely understand why they chose not to). Most of us, when asked what PVR to buy, will consider the person asking the question and give them a fair evaluation for them, not for me. That may legitimately include a lack of trust of Replay, but if that's your only factor, just consider if that's fair for the person who's buying...*
Well, I don't intend to sell my friend, my old clunker that has serious mechanical problems, that I know may recur. In fact, I wouldn't sell it to my enemy. You may be happy in the knowledge that "thousands and thousands of ReplayTV" owners are "thrilled", but can Replay really afford to piss off "thousands" of potential "thrilled" owners? In that "thousands" of affected buyers, there could be more evangelicals like yourself. Imagine now, those people have such a bad taste in their mouths they wouldn't touch Replay with a 10foot pole. I know all about evangilizing a platform, as I've owned Macs for 18 years.


While you clearly are trying to be fair, honestly, I think you are looking at the situation from one perspective, and need to consider the opposite perspective and then draw a balanced conclusion.


If you really want to know what I think the solution is, I think Replay should figure out what the cost of taking units back at the retailers costs, including shipping back to Replay for refurbing. Take that amount, and lop it off the price of the programming service's wholesale cost/true cost/operational cost, what have you, and offer that lowered service price to the affected customers.


----------



## slprp1

Interesting thought (perhaps): When you subscribe to cable tv (at least in my area), they offer an $8.95 upgrade and provide you with a tivo based PVR box FOR FREE! One might argue that , in reality, you are , in fact, RENTING this box from the cable co. and it is not your property. True, but guess what, folks! You are RENTING the service (and essentially the equipment) from replaytv! Without the service, these units are paperweights! DNNA was selling a minimal amount of units at their previous (RIDICULOUS) prices! The fact that they lowered their prices was an absolute neccesity in order to compete with tivo. It's about time!! Insofar as the units that were sold under the guise of 3 year(or lifetime) service, to maintain good public relations and to not continue to alienate their customers (or potential customers) or leave themselves open to disastrous, bad publicity, they should simply swallow their cost (and pride) and allow lifetime (or at least 3 years/$.99 a month thereafter) for ALL units purchased up until christmas '03. Otherwise, the reputation of replaytv will suffer irrepairable harm! Simple, straightforward. DO IT and be done with it. Instead of ALL the BAD PUBLICITY generated by this FIASCO, TURN IT AROUND! NOW! They will not regret it. Besides, where's their CHRISTMAS SPIRIT? DO THE RIGHT THING!! UNDO THIS MESS!! (I hope they're listening) -- MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL AND TO ALL A GOODNIGHT!!!!


----------



## jleavens

Quote:

_Originally posted by KenC29_
*If you really want to know what I think the solution is, I think Replay should figure out what the cost of taking units back at the retailers costs, including shipping back to Replay for refurbing. Take that amount, and lop it off the price of the programming service's wholesale cost/true cost/operational cost, what have you, and offer that lowered service price to the affected customers.*
I actually agree with you on this, even simply as a customer service gesture.


----------



## millwood

this thing may end up a nightmare for rptv: they lose in court, pay a huge financial penalty, and piss off customers whom they are subsidizing.


I hope we will discover how those guys made their decision on this,


----------



## Jeff D

I just thought of something... My two 3k boxes and the one I bought for the parents years ago... net cost on all three... $200/ea with liftetime activation. Lifetime dialup activation (way more expensive than broadband)


Now that was with the hardward from three years ago, and as we all know with time prices drop on hardware and manufacturing.


I can easily see the case that this could have been a fire sale, who could really argue this?


Justin you have an inside line to the pulse of DNNA. But, if you didn't have any contacts there and you saw the news of the price, what would your HONEST first impression about $149 for a 5504? Forget everything "inside" the company that you know... really would you not suspect a firesale? Think back... all the legitimate discounts we've got in the past, this isn't really that unusual. I still think it makes perfect sense that replayTV IS unloading the 5504. However unlikely, it's still possible for DNNA to announce something to replace the 5500 line at CES. The timing and executition of the plan are very suspicious. If you are going to do something like this you do it before thanksgiving, that is the big buying season. Or you wait until AFTER Christmas, not start notifying retailers the week before christmas for the live date to be 2 days before Christmas. That's just plain stupid. DNNA's target... procrastinators? Or to capitalize on after Christmas sales? Big sure, but pale in comparison to the Thanksgiving to Christmas season.


Still no matter how you slice this, this is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen.


----------



## wagoss

ReplayTV is going down on this one. They might win the battle here, but long term, their business model will drive them out of business. They need to honor the sticker on the box and work it out with the retailer some other way.


----------



## jones07

Yo Wag

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...hreadid=345075


----------



## jleavens

Thanks for the link, jones07.


any further facts on this matter should be posted to this thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...hreadid=345075 


this one is now closed!


----------

