I tried the DVR service, here's why I'm cancelling (reluctantly)

Channels DVR Server
#1

With my first month’s subscription coming near, I’ve decided to cancel my DVR subscription today (my monthly subscription is up on at the end of Feb). The service works great. I have no complaints there. The Channels team has put together a first rate product, I have no issues with its capabilities, operation or the excellent support I’ve received.

I’m cancelling for a very simple reason, at current pricing, it’s too expensive vs alternatives. In my opinion, the annual cost will have to come down to around $20 to $25 a year for this to take off. Currently, $8 a month or $96 annually is simply too much for what this service provides vs alternatives.

For perspective, at $8 a month, It’s currently priced on a par with Amazon Prime, Netflix and Hulu.

If I didn’t have Hulu Ad Free, I would likely feel differently about the value proposition of Channels DVR. However, comparing what I’m getting for $12 with Hulu to what I’m getting for $8 with Channels DVR, I can’t justify the cost of both.

I’m glad I was able to try DVR in order to make an informed decision and I hope the Channels team can figure out a way to bring down the monthly cost to better compete with comparable alternative solutions. Its an excellent product for what it does.

2 Likes
Can't Get Past the $8 Price Tag
#2

I went opposite and canceled my Hulu. There’s a lot of shows not on Hulu that I record with Channels, and there’s no surround sound on Hulu. I also like that I can watch a show in progress unlike Hulu where you have to wait a day.

Hulu also doesn’t have any original shows that I watch either like Netflix so it was an easy decision to ditch Hulu for the cheaper option with the ability to record more shows than are on Hulu.

5 Likes
#3

I’m with you V…The Channels DVR is a great piece of code. It has worked flawless for me. But, I use the hdhr for ota only. So only watch sports and news ota (4 major networks). 8 dollars for ota only is a little steep for me so I will be unsubscribing today. If they could come up with a 2 tier subscription plan I would take another look. Maybe 8 for the prime hdhr and 3 to 4 for the ota only boxes.

4 Likes
#4

I 2nd that, $8/month for OTA DVR is too much for me to pull the trigger on purchasing a NAS for this. Tempting, but I am resisting so far.

1 Like
#5

100% agree! I have been wanting to give this a try, but I know that I absolutely won’t be paying $8 a month for an OTA DVR. It would be awesome if they had a lower tier for us OTA folks.

#6

While some may object to the price, why does it matter if you are OTA only or cable? The software is the same (or most of it is).

You have to figure that about $2 per month is for the extended guide data alone leaving the software at about $6 per month. (Using a “free” solution like MythTV still costs $24/year for guide data.) Is the software worth $72/year? That’s a question each person has to ask himself.

I’d like the software to be sustainable and at lower prices, it may not be and then it goes away. However, I do compare the $8/month vs $15/month (or $150/year = $12.50) for TiVo (which some consider the gold standard in DVR) and think twice about it.

Right now, I’m quite pleased with the solution.

7 Likes
#7

Well you are proposing they charge $2 a month instead, that’s a pretty big difference.

That’s probably why they went with $8 because typically cord cutters are frugal people. And no price but free is acceptable to the most frugal among us so they probably thought making it a wee bit higher would net the loss of the cheaper folks.

But at the end of the day there are other options but none with all the same features. So if you want the best DVR that’s tightly integrated into Apple TV you gotta pay for it.

1 Like
#8

The guide data cost is a real issue for these services. At $2 a month per subscriber just to cover guide cost, that’s a pretty significant impediment to growth in this space. I’d hate to have that fixed cost on my balance sheet as a developer.

I’m hoping for the best for the product. Its one of the best examples of software I’ve used, especially on the Apple TV.

I do think the sweet spot monthly cost to grow the subscriber base and sustain the product long term is perhaps significantly lower than current cost. Only the developers know if the current growth rate matches expectations. I’m not in a position to make a judgement on that.

It would appear to be a tough nut to crack either way. Just to gross $100k annually before expenses, at the current $8/month ask, it will take appx 1050 subscribers. So, half the monthly subscription cost and you need 2100 users for the same income. In the consumer’s mind, to my thinking, $4 a month is significantly closer to “no brainer” pricing than $8 and I’d think the exponential growth would more than pay for the difference. But that’s just my guess.

My hope is that the subscriber base grows to the point where the monthly cost can be adjusted to attract more users and provide for sustained development and support at current levels.

1 Like
#9

I’m very happy with the overall Channels iOS, Channels TVOS and Channels DVR at the current pricing. I think there are a couple of aspects to be considered when comparing Channels against other options for television viewing.

  1. Number of Channels per Dollar - This is the obvious #1 criteria that most services use when creating and branding their solutions. Problem is that most options focus on this area and ignore everything else.
  2. Quality of Video/Audio - You’ve got the stations but do you want to watch when it looks and sounds like trash? All this talk about 4k and many are subscribing to services that provide video and audio that isn’t better then what you got with analog television. If it can look good, it requires a high bandwidth internet connection especially if multiple people are viewing at the same time.
  3. Ease of Use - Another area where many solutions break down. What good is all these stations when you can’t find what you want or you end up with different interfaces on every device? I want something that is a joy to use and family friendly.
  4. Stability - Too often bugs and stability get in the way to the point that apps are frustrating to use. They crash, have screen corruption, and in some cases just don’t work (Directv Now?). Demand better.
  5. Support - Can you reach someone in a timely manner and receive help when needed? Do bugs get fixed? Are there timely feature enhancements?

Up to this point I see Channels and the Channels DVR as unique in the market. Channels hits all the right buttons for me. I get top notch OTA HD content, it is a joy to use, low cost, family friendly, stable and I get almost immediate support. Nothing else comes close.

6 Likes
#10

absolutely agree. I can’t record OTA what I get on Hulu and Sling combined (I have not done cable in years). Hulu ad free is well worth it so I am not going back there. Via OTA for me is almost always for sports–I cant justify the monthly just for that. This means I also dont really care if I have extended guide for one off recordings…but I would definitely pay a one time price for the DVR just for the ability to “record what is on right now” or within the current 4 hour guide data.

2 Likes
#11

Good points. I would be fine with recording based on the existing OTA guide data if the monthly cost could be significantly reduced as a result.

Even with the OTA guide, would season pass recording not still be possible? It would seem that regardless if you have a 4 hour OTA guide or a 14 day OTA guide, you should be able to tell the DVR to “record all new episodes and keep X number”

1 Like
#12

$8/month isn’t much for me (and I assume most around here) and I like to support the development of high quality software. There’s a lot of junk out there (HDHomeRun View anyone?).

4 Likes
#13

I’m on the opposite end of that spectrum were as the DVR service at 8$ would be totally justified if it included DRM support for those of us using the SDHDHomeRunPrime with CableCard. I’m holding out on upgrading only for that reason. If there was a guarantee that DRM would certainly be supported on a future date I would gladly subscribe in order to speed up the agenda! I’m praying this will come to light before the competition offers a quality product like Channels DVR. Once competitors figure out how to greatly improve their service quality and combine local network OTA with their own offerings all in the same AppleTV app it’ll spell the end game for Channels future. Honestly I’d wish Channels could offer an OnDemand service in the future that would be so much more convenient over having to shell out money and maintain your own NAS setup. They could maintain their own streaming servers that prerecords all the shows for us and we’d simply select/Que up various shows we’d like to watch whenever time permits us to without having to search and schedule recordings at all. But that’s just what would be the ultimate competition killer and despite how small the Channels developer team is currently they appear to be a bit more intelligent than the current competitors with much larger teams, so I’ll continue to wait a while longer until my patients runs out.

#14

I feel that $8 per month or $96 a year is a lot compared to a free Windows Media Center (or already paid for and no monthly). On the other hand the development of this product is unbelievable, especially compared to all the other failed projects that I paid for (hdhr dvr kickstarter, plexpass dvr, emby and others). My take is this may not be for everybody however if these guys are going to keep developing, improving and growing this product they need to have the financial resources and rewards to keep them motivated. I would rather have this product and pay a premium for its level of development than dump a smaller amount into another product that does not live up to its potential.

8 Likes
#15

C-mon, many people spend $8 or more a day at Starbucks for stinking coffee or a pack of cigarettes.

5 Likes
#16

Well, I think the rate is fair, and im going to pay it for OTA, but you take my caffeine and smokes away and there’s gonna be trouble !

2 Likes
#17

I’m torn about the price. Channels DVR is, as long as you have an Apple TV, by far the best solution out there for antenna TV, and so in principle I’m okay with paying a little more for that. What sets it apart is the on-screen guide, which as I understand increases costs by about $2/mo. relative to other offerings, the incredibly responsive support for end-users and developers, and the user-friendly interface. The first two of these should certainly be integrated into the cost, but given the fee for the apps one can argue that we have already paid for the interface.

Clearly the Channels team need to be able to make a living, and for such a quality product I am happy to pay more initially to get it going while the team develop their user-base. However, I do think it is too high to be attractive long-term, especially in light of the up-front costs (tuner hardware plus app costs), but if that price were to include full cablecard support it would be reasonable. I would like to see a commitment towards the intent of lowering costs to $5/mo., in line with the Plex Pass service (which includes DVR and much more), either once the more intense initial development is complete or once the user base yields sufficient revenues. I fear that the current price is going to limit that user-base growth in the context of cheaper competition from Plex (which offers broader functionality). I appreciate that it is a tricky balancing act.

For those comparing the Channels DVR service with Hulu, I would add that the fair comparison in the US (only) is with Hulu + CBS All Access (+ the free CW and PBS apps) - up-front costs (hardware + apps). Once commercial skipping works better then the extra cost for Hulu Ad-free should be figured in. But bear in mind that the streaming TV game is changing rapidly, and so all of this may change soon.

#18

A couple of additional thoughts on the monthly channels dvr costs vs other options.

  1. Until I dropped Directv sat service I was paying per receiver. A dvr was $10 and a reciever was $5 per month. Now I pay $8 for a dvr that can be viewed on many more televisions and devices then before.

  2. When you compare Channels to streaming options like Hulu don’t forget to factor in that streaming requires high bandwidth internet. If multiple people are going to be streaming at the same time will need more then a basic network connection that the channels dvr requires. This should be factored into overall costs.

#19

I recently dumped uverse tv for direct now and channels dvr. Sports are the only reason I still have directv now. I have been able to get all the content I need with OTA tv to fill my entertainment needs. Obviously, this a personal issue that varies from person to person.

This is why I think channels dvr is worth $8 a month. One, it gives me the option to own and control content on my own terms. Streaming services are always change what content is available. With Channels dvr I can do whatever I want with the content and no one can ever take it away. I can watch it wherever I want. I can download it to any device I want. Two, I realize I am helping to fund the development of this product. The development team is constantly making improvements (more than I can say for at&t and directv now). No large app developer or company will have incentive to develop anything like this because of the ownership listed above. Forth, while this is the most expensive dvr option I have seen (more than plex dvr (pass) or HDHR dvr), it is clearly far superior to either of those products.

Finally, price can’t come down until popularity goes up. This is basic economics. Especially, when you lose 25% of your fee right off the top (but also part of why this product is superior). I hope this product continues to grow in popularity because I think this a great product, and I hope the best for the developers. Great product that I have found to be a great value for me and my needs.

5 Likes
#20

I don’t think it is fair to compare Channels to a service like Hulu or Netflix. The Channels DVR allows you to record a crazy number of local channels (depending on your market) with content that just simply isn’t available through Hulu/Netflix. You have the convenience of recording anything you want and watching it immediately. Channels DVR should be compared to Tivo, Tablo, Channel Master, Plex, and Simple.TV.

I’ve tried out a Tablo network DVR ($5/mo) and a HDHomeRun with Plex ($5/mo for Plex). The Channels interface on the Apple TV is by far the best among its competitors. It really isn’t even close. The ease of use is just incredible compared to those other options. Tablo is actually pretty slick but it lacks features, crippling its usability. For example, you can’t start a recording 1-2 minutes early, which results in me missing the first minute or so of many Primetime shows. Also, the Tablo transcodes everything to h264, which lowers the quality (it is obvious) and creates a delay when switching channels. Plex’s DVR is half-baked at this point, requiring you to schedule recordings from the server only and not from the clients.

If you are using an Apple TV, there simply isn’t a better option than Channels at this point. Not to mention the fact that Channels dev team is actively engaged with its customers to fix glitches and add features. Their price point of $8 is not unreasonable, but I would like to see an annual or lifetime price. I agree with others that to get a large initial group of subscribers, the price needs to be closer to $5. Maybe offer a locked in rate of $5/mo for anyone that subscribes before April (similar to DirecTV Now offering its top package for $35/mo for early adopters)?

2 Likes