I think the change may also suggest their commitment has changed…
from your blog reference
they aren’t so commited anymore, not to say they don’t care, just not as commited.
Isn’t that what a troll does? 
Except they don’t admit it… it’s usually just obvious
1 Like
This is exactly the part I don’t understand. If they wanted to sell more units, why wouldn’t they offer a phase-in period? I’m sure there are plenty of people in the same boat as you are, especially since the new Quad is coming out here in a couple of weeks. Does Nuvyyo, really think people are going to drop $200 on the Quad and then spend another $150 of the Lifetime Subscription?
Now if they said you have 2-3 months before this new subscription plan kicks in I imagine they would see a big boost in sales.
I would prefer they open it up to new users as well. As a new user myself, I am waiting to purchase the Quad as my first unit. Once I use it for a few weeks, I will have a good idea if I want to add a Dual to the setup. Something I won’t be doing if I also have to add another Subscription for it.
I tend to agree. The blog post states our subscription “fund research and development of new features” They’ve never mentioned before we were subscribing to support R&D.
The subscription change does suck. I own multiple rental units and it is was a nice feature to offer those units some basic TV service without having to pay a large monthly fee (ie, cable or satellite service). All I would need to do is pick up another Tablo box and add it to my subscription. Simple, easy and was a good value. With the change to the subscription that value is no longer there and I believe they will lose a lot of new customers to FireTv Recast.
With Tablo’s new and current subscription model this is a sample of what it would cost to be a Tablo customer
• Tablo Dual Lite 2 tuner = $100
• 1 TB hard drive = $50
• Tablo subscription = $150 (lifetime)
FireTv ReCast your sample cost would be
• Recast 2 tuner = $230
• Hard drive = $0 (it is included)
• Recast subscription = $0 (lifetime included)
So now it looks like I will need to spend $300 for every new Tablo unit versus $230 to switch over to FireTv Recast. While I understand Tablo might have some rising costs and there was a need to reevaluate their pricing structure, but I personally believe this was a bad move. Any increased revenue Tablo might has been hoping for with the new pricing structure would be negated by the loss of any new (and possibly current) customers. The ability to add up to 10 Tablo devices on one subscription is what made them a better value and they just took that away. As for me, any new rental units I pick up I will most likely just get the FireTV Recast.
I think the story is this… The Commercial Skip feature requires that we send data to Nuvyyo to be analyzed. That consumes bandwidth and resources on their end which isn’t free. Instead of charging people for the Commercial Skip feature (which would have really pissed people off), they made the change to the Subscription model instead. I guess they figured it was the lesser of two evils. That is my guess.
Please refrain from ad hominem attacks, they don’t help the discussion. It’s not my point, it’s a fact TOS’s are clearly stated.
You referencing a “clause hidden in the TOS”, is disconcerting. If a person were to read the terms, how can anything be hidden? This sounds like “it’s not my fault” excuse. The anologies of offering a child - no, that’s not how contract law works – it’s in the terms, Compliance with Laws section. They covered it - not hidden.
Do you need a dictionary? I don’t think that term means what you think it means.
Strawman argument is the best you got? lol
Hyperbole, obviously. “If you ever used my service in the past you need to pay me $10”. Better? Same difference, but you can’t try to discredit this one with a strawman.
As we’ve been digging through the Subscription Agreement, it does state you agreeing not to rent or lease access to your subscribed services.
I’m glad you’re stopping the armchair quaterbacking, it wasn’t helping anyone.
1 Like
I believe there was some text in the old agreement about being allowed some commercial use. I am not selling or renting out the subscription or making any money from the subscription, which I believe it what they are trying to avoid there. This is more like when you rent out an AirBnB and you get “free wifi” in that rental unit. They are not reselling/renting/leasing internet service, just allowing the tenants to use it.
I’ll revise my stance a bit. Based on the wording above, Tablo is operating to the letter of the agreement. I stand by the rest of my opinion; it’s a way to reward your longest customers.
I do agree with you Max. It is bad form on Tablo’s part. Unfortunately, almost all ToS agreements have some BS clause that allows the company to alter the agreement anytime they want.
Yea, I didn’t really mean to call you out. That’s more of a standard license thing, and it may have something to do with not “re-selling” OTA broadcast programs liability issues.
I agree, but the only point I’ve been trying to make in the last dozen (more?) posts – just because they can do it, doesn’t mean they can legally do it.
Here’s an example, Safeway changed their TOS in the middle of a lawsuit (actual caselaw linked in the summary article from medium), judge didn’t go for it. The fact that had a clause “they can change it anytime they want” didn’t work for them: https://medium.com/@jlkoepke/we-can-change-these-terms-at-anytime-the-detritus-of-terms-of-service-agreements-712409e2d0f1
But it’s not apples to apples to what happened here. Here a product was sold with one set of conditions. Then the conditions changed [months] after payment was taken.
Like I said upthread, looking at their exact wording [not what was posted on the forums or facebook – but the actual wording of the item that was purchased], what they did is probably legal. Still leaves a taste in my mouth though.
Tablo stood behind their original word. 