James Fee
06-09-2004, 06:00 PM
<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/06/08/financial1703EDT0256.DTL' target='_blank'>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/06/08/financial1703EDT0256.DTL</a><br /><br /></div><img src="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/tivo80x100.jpg" />"Shares of TiVo Inc. dropped more than 14 percent Tuesday after DirecTV sold its entire stake in the digital video recorder pioneer, heightening concerns that the satellite TV company would end their relationship. The bulk of TiVo's new subscribers last quarter came through its partnership with DirecTV, which offers TiVo service built into some of its television set-top boxes so that users can pause live TV, easily set up recordings and skip past commercials."<br /><br />Of course this came the <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/06/09/BUG4D735241.DTL&type=business">same day</a> that TiVo announces that they will allow internet movies and music to be downloaded to video recorders. Stories about TiVo's death are just about as popular as those about Apple's, and I think this really won't affect them in any way long term. Why does DirecTV need to own part of TiVo? Also since DirecTV has been shedding other nonessential parts of the company, why hold on to TiVo? Their licensing agreement will still continue for at least a couple years. What this does is free TiVo up to work with cable companies since DirecTV had a board seat and I'm sure didn't want TiVo signing with Time-Warner Cable or Cox.