ESPN Ultimate Remote is now shipping, inexplicable packaging comes free

Just in time for Father's Day, ESPN's tvCompass-built WiFi Ultimate Remote is finally available, and rapidly making its way into the awaiting, Cheeto-stained fingertips of a couch potato near you. It still costs $300, and with a good number of laptops retailing for that price these days, it's certainly hard to justify, but forget all that... who on earth thought this packaging was a good idea? It kind of looks like a dumbbell, but not. We're really at a loss for words here. It's almost like ESPN wants to fail.

[Malikye @ Jun 15th 2008 4:57AM]

i wonder if the only channel you can select with that remote is just ESPN

[Blaine Oliver @ Jun 15th 2008 6:13AM]

Looks like they glued the most garish red to what can only be described as a mobile phone screen and face, along with a package that can only resemble weights of some kind. Then add a high price and the money waving fools will be all over it.

[Bufsabre @ Jun 15th 2008 9:07AM]

thats one third of my tv viewership anyways

[aaron @ Jun 15th 2008 1:18PM]

REVIEW HERE!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/technology/chi-mon-tech-buzz-espn-wifi-remojun09,0,2442437.column


Looks kinda cool.

[CUBSWILLWIN @ Jun 15th 2008 5:34PM]

Well, what sucks is that I don't have ESPN (I'm sad for myself).

PS: Chicago Tribune is the best newspaper I've read. :)

[Mabedan @ Jun 15th 2008 5:01AM]

i like the packing! :)

[wasabi @ Jun 15th 2008 5:01AM]

john madden is the most dry commentator of all time.

[Max @ Jun 15th 2008 10:43AM]

Boom! He's not on ESPN. Good try though.

[wasabi @ Jun 15th 2008 9:45PM]

lol yea you're right. oops that's probably he's on fox.

[jaalin @ Jun 15th 2008 5:08AM]

go lakers :(

[Paul @ Jun 15th 2008 5:09AM]

I'll be using a regular remote to watch the Lakers lose to the Celtics!

[tekdroid @ Jun 15th 2008 5:15AM]

It's the ULTIMATE remote, it must come in ULTIMATE gaudy and impossible-to-open packaging. Our retail partners demand it. It's par for the course. Plus we want to catch Joe Slob's eye at retail. How else are we gonna do it?

Regards,
Mr Plastiq Fantastiq
ESPN Marketing & Brand Development

[giuliop @ Jun 15th 2008 5:39AM]

So, Paul, let me see. You are already set on shelling out $300 for this remote control of dubious usefulness, but "forget all that". Then you go into the store and see that packaging; a thing you are going to pull apart and throw in the dustbin as soon as you get home, and that has nothing to do with the remote itself.
And then you think "Whoa whoa... What's that? THAT packaging? Ewww... I'm not gonna buy it! No way! ESPN WANTS TO FAIL!". So the remote fails. Is that so?

[Matt @ Jun 15th 2008 11:49AM]

Packaging is easily the most important part of marketing a tangible good.

[RikF @ Jun 15th 2008 2:55PM]

"throw in the dustbin"

Bad boy! Separate and recycle!

[Garst @ Jun 15th 2008 5:41AM]

Did anyone else think Engadget was reporting on a fire alarm when they first glanced at the picture? I now know it is time for bed. Good night.

[aaronbareford @ Jun 15th 2008 5:53AM]

$300 for a fathers day present? xD

I usually spend the grand total of... £20 at most lol

Does that make me a bad person, or just sane :)

[tekdroid @ Jun 15th 2008 5:54AM]

no, just cheap
;)

[naz @ Jun 16th 2008 1:39PM]

if i spend $300 on a fathers day present, all my dad would say "Why did you spend that much on a present! do you still have the receipt?"

[CUBSWILLWIN @ Jun 15th 2008 5:36PM]

naz, if I gave my Dad a 40 dollar goft, he'd go even more insane.

[umijin @ Jun 15th 2008 5:54AM]

Ugly or not, it's an incredible waste of plastic, hence petroleum. That's the real issue. They could have made a more attractive package using fewer resources.

[DarkUltra @ Jun 15th 2008 6:14AM]

I was waiting for a post like this. Not only waste of plastic, but also cargo space and so more petroleum needed for shipping. If 10% boycott products with excessive packaging, it would really scare the manufacturers i am certain.

[tekdroid @ Jun 15th 2008 6:16AM]

yeah agreed.

Just check your local supermarket. All I know is ONE day soonish it will all change. The resources crunch (which we are already waging wars for) will see to that.

Standard bulk canisters in supermarkets each containing ONE (colourful) label advertising the product, not hundreds of separate packages for the same item like we have now. Saving heaps of space, saving heaps of money, too (and the nifty ability to undercut traditional chains doing business wastefully). Standard delivery and refill trucks/ methods for suppliers. Standard spouts and refill tubs. Automated printed stickers for refills (or RFID-based stuff).

All easy to administer and refill with no mess.
That is what I wanna see (which will work for most products), and I'd open a place like that if I had the capital.

This way bulk purchases could also be rewarded with lower per/kg rates, too. And all sorts of incentives could be attached to your purchase habits (should you wish to leave some details for you to be tracked).

That should be supermarket shopping now, frankly. What it comes down to is we ALL pay for wasteful packaging in more ways than just the initial purchase.

As for non-supermaket products and people complaining about costs of fuel and increasing prices of petroleum-related products, it's just a matter of time before the market forces industry to be less wasteful simply because extravagantly wasteful packaging is costing their customers and these customers are tightening the ol' pursestrings...

[monkfishbandana @ Jun 15th 2008 6:21AM]

Exactly. I'm not an environmental fanatic, however conserving oil resources can only be a good thing. Not to mention this stuff is impossible to open, gives people seriously nasty cuts if you open it improperly, and does the same job as cardboard packaging would - this makes no sense.

[frozo @ Jun 15th 2008 7:25AM]

Looks like the packaging was designed so you gan actually get your hand around it at the store to get a more of a feel for it than you could if it were totally enclosed. The top section was probably added for stacking purposes and/or to make up for the marketing real estate that was lost on the back due to its design.

[Maestro @ Jun 15th 2008 8:03AM]

The ESPN Phone thinks this is a fantastic idea.

[Thi mam(kris120890) @ Jun 15th 2008 8:06AM]

Its as if someone was designing a mobile on extreme time constraints and decided to just put remote electronics in it just so they can show their boss it actually does something. so more than anything its a........................................................ mobile gone wrong.

[fourthletter @ Jun 15th 2008 8:26AM]

Who let all the hippies in ? happliy slaving out their enviromentlist BS from the comfort of their power eating PCs, busy complaining about some extra packaging on a remote control, yes sure thing ! Americans need to start buying normal sized cars first, over here in europe a 2Litre engine is considered large.
How about stopping all the bloody AC while you're at it ;)

[bartoron @ Jun 15th 2008 12:33PM]

Because turning off the A/C is a reasonable possibility when it's in the 30's Celsius and it's rediculously humid.

And no, opening windows doesn't help if it's not windy.

[umijin @ Jun 15th 2008 12:34PM]

Ummm - No AC here. We heat our home with south facing windows in winter, and cool it in the summer by opening the windows, turning off the lights.

And it's not just about the environment. Plastics like this will speed up the depletion of your petroleum resources. You only have a few decades left, but I guess you enjoy paying $4.00 + per gallon of gas.

[bartoron @ Jun 15th 2008 2:46PM]

Opening a few windows isn't going to heat a house in the winter when it's around freezing outside.

[bartoron @ Jun 15th 2008 2:47PM]

Sorry, scratch the opening part. I meant windows in general aren't going to heat a home when it's around freezing and there's not that much sun.

[PSU_Boss @ Jun 15th 2008 2:53PM]

um.. without AC, my room would be 95 degrees during the summer, with the skylights open. And that's not an exaggeration, and not bearable at all.

[William Donelson @ Jun 15th 2008 8:43AM]

Packaging IS explicable:

IT's designed to take up LOTS OF SPACE on the shelves.

[Torx @ Jun 15th 2008 9:15AM]

My harmony ONE would kick that remotes arse.

[Quentin @ Jun 15th 2008 12:52PM]

Considering I paid less than $100 for my Harmony, it looks like you are paying for the brand mostly. It shouldn't cost $300 for a licensed remote, at LEAST 150 or less.

[Some Kid @ Jun 15th 2008 10:18AM]

ESPN is the most watched cable channel and this is still a horrible idea
what is soooooo good that they can retail this for $300. Most logitech remotes that are either cheaper or more expensive are still beter than this. And the color is hideous
ill get the E over this for $300 thank you
who is the base maker of this remote anyways?
MOTO, Logitech, who?????

[Andy TGD @ Jun 15th 2008 10:32AM]

The packaging is an ingenious buy 1 get 1 free offer - buy the remote... get a free plastic weight lifting kit!

[Rick @ Jun 15th 2008 10:59AM]

It is shaped like a dumbell so dumbells can relate to it and buy one or maybe two.

[s1pacrat @ Jun 15th 2008 11:02AM]

It could be that ESPN thinks that people will spend more money on a bigger package, of that many people would find it hard to spend $300 on a small package.

Of course, that doesn't take into account that these people are already spending $300 on a bright red TV remote...

[happy_penguin @ Jun 15th 2008 11:34AM]

This remote just looks hard to use. Too many buttons to be practical although if lots of buttons = bragging rights, this thing is awesome. Nothing says "manly" like lots of buttons. Tim Taylor approves. :)

I still like the Tivo remote better than any other I've ever used. Now that I have the lighted Tivo 3.0 remote I love it even more.

[Pete @ Jun 15th 2008 11:50AM]

$300? And no "MUTE WIFE" button??? I'm out...

[derX @ Jun 15th 2008 11:55AM]

C'mon, I'll say it, we're all thinking it.

EeeSPN remote > ESPN remote.

[aaron @ Jun 15th 2008 1:15PM]

Nope. Can't say I was thinking it at all...

[El Taco @ Jun 15th 2008 4:47PM]

derX, I'm pretty sure you're the only one that was thinking that

[derX @ Jun 15th 2008 7:38PM]

I can take a hint. I'll go back on the meds.

[Casey @ Jun 15th 2008 2:51PM]

That package is meant to catch the consumers eye on a retail shelf. You guys probably got that one through a shipment.
I would have done something different with the graphics on the front though, but I don't work for the company they probably out sourced this to.

[phanbouy @ Jun 15th 2008 4:13PM]

maybe you should stay anonymous with comments like that

[JV @ Jun 15th 2008 6:00PM]

Y'all are dense. The package is designed to keep people from opening it in the store and stealing a fracking $300 remote control!

[John @ Jun 15th 2008 10:09PM]

I just can't get enough of people using the work "frakking". It's frakking awsome. Keep on frakkin' dude! Frak me!