Chart: Comparison between Dish MRV and Direct MRV

DodgerKing

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 14, 2007
16,776
26
SoCal
I create a chart comparing DirecTV's MRV setup to that of Dish's Hopper/Joey setup.
 

Attachments

  • Hopper VS D-MRV.pdf
    112.8 KB · Views: 862
Last edited:

satjay

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Jun 30, 2005
12,676
846
Michigan
I think in terms of upgrade, it's competitive on the direct side, while people have received a discount price they seem to be holding the line on 400 for upgrade as a current customer
 

patmurphey

SatelliteGuys Pro
Dec 29, 2006
1,297
442
New Jersey
How is it a fair comparison to tout secondary DVRs with Direct and not include the impact of multiple Hoppers on an account. (Monthly charge on additional Hopper is the same as a Joey.)
 

stardust3

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Mar 7, 2006
8,603
6,822
.....
This is excellent timing on dish's part. Release a highly touted new system, get as many as possible to upgrade & then when the price increases next year all those upgrades will be under contract. Good move for dish, except I ain't buying into it.
 

sparc

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jul 24, 2006
1,721
13
I think in terms of upgrade, it's competitive on the direct side, while people have received a discount price they seem to be holding the line on 400 for upgrade as a current customer
not sure i understand what you mean.

Many of us are dish customers already. So, we would be comparing to the new customer promotions for Directv.

and same goes for current directv customers. They would compare to new customer pricing at Dish Network.

The only situation where someone would compare upgrade pricing for both is if you were a customer of both simultaneously.
 

mdram

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 24, 2005
4,056
793
Md
How is it a fair comparison to tout secondary DVRs with Direct and not include the impact of multiple Hoppers on an account. (Monthly charge on additional Hopper is the same as a Joey.)

hes saying you can use exiting dvrs you have with directv, hes not adding a second hr34
 

Lt Disher

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 26, 2009
550
19
Iowa
How is it a fair comparison to tout secondary DVRs with Direct and not include the impact of multiple Hoppers on an account. (Monthly charge on additional Hopper is the same as a Joey.)

I agree. I think that an *'ed entry is at least called for. The chart implies a total of only 3 tuners on a Hopper system while the Direct system shows 2-5 plus 1-5. This is not a fair comparison. I think there is a Directv bias in the chart. I know the connectivity for the second hopper is not yet implemented, but to be fair a total of 6 possible tuners for a Hopper system should be somehow noted.
 

mdram

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 24, 2005
4,056
793
Md
I agree. I think that an *'ed entry is at least called for. The chart implies a total of only 3 tuners on a Hopper system while the Direct system shows 2-5 plus 1-5. This is not a fair comparison. I think there is a Directv bias in the chart. I know the connectivity for the second hopper is not yet implemented, but to be fair a total of 6 possible tuners for a Hopper system should be somehow noted.

he is basing it off of 1 unit on each system
it just indicates that the dish systems does not interface with the existing tuners

if you add a column to allow 2 hoppers, dont forget to put a secong hr34 in for balance
 

Lt Disher

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 26, 2009
550
19
Iowa
he is basing it off of 1 unit on each system
it just indicates that the dish systems does not interface with the existing tuners

if you add a column to allow 2 hoppers, dont forget to put a secong hr34 in for balance

The HR 34 is already listed as a secondary receiver on his chart. The problem is that he does not list the second possible Hopper anywhere on the chart. This skews the overall picture.
 

JM42

SatelliteGuys Pro
Lifetime Supporter
Nov 25, 2010
1,748
280
GA
Any chart will never be a good fit for all circumstances. Perspective here definitely comes across as a DirecTV user looking at Hopper.

The chart's D* DVR/MRV pricing is based on current user pricing. New users have a much higher base rate at $20, but are actually promo'd down to $1 less than the chart shows ($10 vs $11). Which one is best to use? Directv seems to play more retention games than Dish does, but the base rates in year three are $15/month or more higher than Dish in year three if these numbers are right: http://www.satelliteguys.us/attachment.php?attachmentid=74345&d=1329699984 .

Any price projections past next february are pure conjecture anyway.

For me, I know I don't like the current D* MRV. I want the transparent trick play Hopper/Joey should provide. D* should have that once RVU boxes are out, but they aren't yet. On the other hand two Hoppers will not be integrated at launch, and that is a big thing for me.
 

DodgerKing

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 14, 2007
16,776
26
SoCal
patmurphey said:
How is it a fair comparison to tout secondary DVRs with Direct and not include the impact of multiple Hoppers on an account. (Monthly charge on additional Hopper is the same as a Joey.)

Because it is currently not an option. When it becomes an option then the chart will be adjusted accordingly.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
 

DodgerKing

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 14, 2007
16,776
26
SoCal
Lt Disher said:
The HR 34 is already listed as a secondary receiver on his chart. The problem is that he does not list the second possible Hopper anywhere on the chart. This skews the overall picture.

Because the second hopper is not an option now as you currently cannot have two hoppers see each other in the same network. Once the software is available then 3 tuners will be added to the chart.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
 

DodgerKing

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 14, 2007
16,776
26
SoCal
Updated to add a note about allowing a second Hopper to be integrated into the MRV setup once the software becomes available.
 

Attachments

  • Hopper VS D-MRV.pdf
    113.7 KB · Views: 210
  • Hopper VS D-MRV.xls
    31 KB · Views: 203

Lt Disher

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 26, 2009
550
19
Iowa
Because the second hopper is not an option now as you currently cannot have two hoppers see each other in the same network. Once the software is available then 3 tuners will be added to the chart.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

Deleted, sorry i missed your added note.
 

DodgerKing

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 14, 2007
16,776
26
SoCal
Based on the chart provided, where is the so called "competitive" pricing?
I can add upfront prices, but there are so many options that the chart will become to confusing. On the Direct side since you can use any HD DVR or HD receiver (except for the H20), the pricing structure can vary greatly. An existing sub can pay nothing as they may already have the equipment. Or an existing sub can purchase an HR34 at a certain price, pay less for another DVR, or upgrade for free. New subs get some equipment for free and others they have to pay for, and that depends on which equipment. New subs get different deals and promotions all of the time. Plus there are prices for network setup or one can use their own router and not pay anything.

On the Dish side there are different prices for new subs and existing subs, plus package changes. Then what happens if some want to add additional Hoppers instead of Joeys?
 

Tampa8

Supporting Founder - I'll stand up and say so
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
18,142
7,784
Tampa/Eastern Ct
It's good as far as it goes and it does show the weakness of not allowing a VIP receiver on the system. (Though I understand why, less chance of accouint stacking, but still....) That said;

I think since it's so new it isn't even out yet, it should be noted an OTA tuner is planned.

I also think the makeup of the chart automatically puts the Hopper at a disadvantage. The stated use of the hopper is that two would be used for more tuners, rather than more DVR's. I think that should be noted along with the cost of $7, an aquistion cost, and a note the integration software is planned.

I have no problem making it clear the OTA and integration is not yet available, but to not mention it for a product not even available yet does not seem right.
 
Last edited:

digiblur

SatelliteGuys Master
Jun 8, 2005
14,190
4
Louisiana
We all know Dish's meaning of the word SOON though ;) But yes, it should be on the chart saying planned unknown delivery date or something like that.
 

DodgerKing

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Nov 14, 2007
16,776
26
SoCal
It's good as far as it goes and it does show the weakness of not allowing a VIP receiver on the system. (Though I understand why, less chance of accouint stacking, but still....) That said;

I think since it's so new it isn't even out yet, it should be noted an OTA tuner is planned.

I also think the makeup of the chart automatically puts the Hopper at a disadvantage. The stated use of the hopper is that two would be used for more tuners, rather than more DVR's. I think that should be noted along with the cost of $7, an aquistion cost, and a note the integration software is planned.

I have no problem making it clear the OTA and integration is not yet available, but to not mention it for a product not even available yet does not seem right.
Thanks for pointing that out. I was not aware that OTA will be available in the future.

Just an FYI. The chart was made to be as accurate, clear, and unbiased as possible. If it leads one into thinking that one service is better than the other, that was not my intention.

If anybody has any suggestions on what should be added or changed, by all means, please let me know. I want this to be accurate.
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts

Top