Cord Cutters Growing or Slowing, Depending Who You Ask
Last week telecom analyst firm MoffettNathanson estimated that pay TV providers lost 113,000 TV subscribers last quarter
something they argued was thanks in part to a refusal to seriously compete on price. The latest data from the Leichtman Research Group
puts that estimate smaller, at just 25,000 net subscribers lost last quarter -- down from 50,000 this time last year.
Leichtman notes the top nine cable companies lost about 600,000 video subscribers last quarter, the biggest impact on cable since 2010. As is usually the case, most of those customers fled to telcoTV and satellite TV alternatives. Hit particularly hard last quarter was Cablevision, Time Warner Cable and Charter.
"The multi-channel industry was essentially flat in the third quarter of 2013, with major providers as a whole performing slightly better than in the third quarter of 2012," Leichtman. "Quarterly losses for cable providers were exacerbated by Time Warner Cable's programming dispute with CBS, but these losses benefitted Telco and DBS providers with higher subscriber gains than a year ago."
As many of our users are quick to point out, these numbers don't include the number of users who are reducing the number of services -- or the channel bundles -- available from their cable operator. Those numbers are likely to be substantial as users grow increasingly weary of bi-annual rate hikes for massive bundles of channels left unwatched.
Bruce Leichtman has traditionally been a cord cutting phenomenon denier, while Craig Moffett has recently acknowledged cord cutting was a real thing
after years of insisting the small but meaningful trend didn't exist. Whether cord cutting is a growing phenomenon fueled by cable's refusal to compete on price -- or a fleeting blip on the radar in an industry with stalled growth -- depends on who you ask.
Re: I know I cut the cord
said by buzz_4_20:That was the very reason why I never made it through an Aereo trial. My wife and I used to watch the "news" in the mornings before heading out the door, cut TV services (and are out of range for OTA for all but 3 months of the year) almost 2 years ago and decided to give it a try again. I timed it, 43 minutes we had one of the stations on, and they played commercials for 35 of those minutes. The other 8 minutes of "news" were chittering and clucking by the people on screen.
Try getting some time away from advertizing for a few weeks, then come back and take a good look at it.
What I learned is that TV really didn't offer me any life improvement. Cutting it made a rather drastic improvement in my quality of life, just because I wouldn't sit my asz on the couch and flip channels for 3 hours. Even now when I spend all day at home, chances are good that the TV will remain off for all but 2~3 hours. I'd rather be physically engaged, and baring that I've gotten back into reading ~ which is FAR more entertaining than anything I've seen on a screen in many, many years.
But, my wife and I are unicorns. We don't Really exist....
Unsustainable... -Rental fee increases
-Channel flipping, moving
-Advertising and marketing revenue waste
What used to be $15/month for basic is now over $40 (fees, taxes, etc).
Notice all include only 3 tiers of "separation" (Basic, HD, Extreme) then PPV channels (like ShoTime, HBO, ESPN...)
Average package with phone, net, HDTV is $75mnth (typically a year or two commitment). Others admit it can be $100-$150/mnth in no time with packages, speeds, channels.
Want to know another cordcutter reason: economics. unemployment. housing bust. family. health. region climate (yeah, about those tornadoes...sad)
compressed Channels with microblocking, blur, glitches etc. They should call it HD lite because customers are not getting the real experience. Instead of upgrading their system, and implement MPG-4 they rather load their pockets at the next quarterly earnings.