Cord Cutting Is Alive And Well, Despite Some Analyst Denial Wednesday Mar 19 2014 18:09 EDT As we recently noted, while traditional cable TV operators lost 1,734,521 subscribers last year, most of those users fled to telco TV operators AT&T and Verizon. Overall, the pay TV sector saw a decline of 105,000 overall customers in 2013. While not much, SNL Kagan released numbers today that were slightly higher, the firm stating that the pay TV industry saw a decline of 251,000 subscribers last year. To hear some analysts tell it, this small but notable decline is proof positive that the entire "cord cutting" trend doesn't technically exist. Swanni over at TV Predictions for example, is ready to throw in the towel on the entire cord cutting phenomenon entire: quote:
The latest study from Leitchtman Research should, once and for all, end claims from some tech journalists and Wall Street analysts that a large number of Americans are dumping their pay TV service in favor of inexpensive online video. The study found that the 13 largest pay TV services lost just 105,000 net subscribers overall in 2013. Considering that the 13 operators offer service to 94.6 million subscribers, that means the losses represented just 0.1 percent of their audience. Few trends can be based on 0.1 percent of any audience.
Time will certainly tell the scale of cord cutting's impact, but it's important to point out that most analysts have repeatedly stated that cord cutting is a small small but important phenomenon, one that's going to grow if the sector doesn't see price reductions and greater channel bundling flexibility. It's also worth noting the legacy TV sector fights tooth and nail against this phenomenon, using weapons ranging from usage caps to restrictive licensing designed to kill off innovative new services. In short, the giant deep-pocketed TV industry is spending countless hours and dollars to fight this trend using every trick in the book (except price reductions, of course)...yet they're still seeing subscriber declines. Groups like SNL Kagan expect the trend to increase, especially for satellite TV providers, who in the last few quarters have only just barely been able to hold on to flat quarter-over-quarter growth. The Leichtman research also doesn't tell the whole story in context; many customers may be slowly downgrading from more expensive TV packages in an attempt to cut costs (dubbed "cord shaving" or cord cheating by many analysts). That's certainly part of the trend, but isn't being factored into the "proof" that cord cutting is a dead duck. I think one important metric to keep an eye on for cable operators will be digital voice subscribers. As customers look to cut costs, and clearly run out of room to do so via smaller cable packages, more and more are going to see digital voice as a redundant service that will likely see the axe long before their cable packages. As cable operators start to see more cable TV and digital voice defections only one thing is certain: the price of your broadband connection is going to skyrocket courtesy of limited competition. |
  acadielPress fire to begin
Premium Member
join:2002-06-22
Atlanta
kudos:2
Apple AirPort Extreme (2013)
ARRIS SB6183
|
acadiel
Premium Member
2014-Mar-19 6:37 pm
Digital voice goin away, yep.Some true things I feel will make people ditch cable digital voice:
Redundant with cell phone service, yes.
Costs more because you are forced to rent an eMTA with companies like Comcast, yes.
Only have it because it's a part of a bundle to lower your overall bill, yep. Bundle costs get higher, voice will wind up being disconnected. | |
|  | | |
ptb42
Member
2014-Mar-19 7:42 pm
Re: Digital voice goin away, yep.said by acadiel:Only have it because it's a part of a bundle to lower your overall bill, yep. My current bundle of internet, TV, and digital phone is exactly the same monthly cost as a bundle of equivalent internet and TV, without digital phone. Unbundled, internet + TV is substantially higher. So, my digital phone is effectively free. I chose to keep the home phone number I've had for 20 years. | |
| | |  Tomek
Premium Member
join:2002-01-30
Valley Stream, NY |
Tomek
Premium Member
2014-Mar-20 7:49 am
Re: Digital voice goin away, yep.Same here and they threw international calling for "free."
But I think if I had alternative to cable TV with some IPTV providers, then I could possibly dump phone + TV
--
Semper Fi | |
|
| | |
to acadiel
Digital Voice won't go away because there is still a need for fax services (that don't involve going to Staples / Kinkos, etc). | |
|
 IowaCowboyIowa native
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1 |
I fled to satelliteI fled to DirecTV and the only services I have through Comcast are my Home Automation and my High-Speed Internet.
Home Phone is through Verizon and TV is through DirecTV.
Cable is just way too expensive because of the physical infrastructure involved. You have to run cabling through existing public and private right-of-way from the headend to the end user.
Satellite tends to be cheaper as you only have the headend, uplink facilities, satellites, and end user equipment. You don't have to tear up lawns when a cable goes bad, just send a new receiver when it goes bad or replace a bad LNBF.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.
I have not and will not cut the cord. | |
| | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
EARTH |
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Mar-19 7:30 pm
Re: I fled to satelliteExcept that you have cable for internet. Infrastructure for both cable and satellite is expensive. | |
| | | IowaCowboyIowa native
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1 |
Re: I fled to satelliteUnfortunately the only option for internet is cable. Luckily I have a choice for TV in terms of satellite. | |
| | | | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
EARTH |
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Mar-20 6:30 pm
Re: I fled to satelliteAlso, in terms of cost, DirecTV is most often more expensive than cable, U-Verse, FIOS, or DISH. | |
| | | | | IowaCowboyIowa native
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1
1 edit |
Re: I fled to satelliteWe can't get FiOS here or U-Verse. My Verizon bill this month was $115.05 for DirecTV with 225 channels, Genie DVR, and three TVs along with home phone (regional essentials with caller ID and Call Waiting).
The cost is well worth it, the video quality is better, the equipment is better, and we get the channels we want on the lower tiers. The Comcast franchise here makes you buy all the channels you don't want to buy the good channels. For some reason, Turner Classic Movies (an important channel to us) is on their sports bundle (that adds $8 for one channel along with a bundle of channels we don't watch) so we have buy all kinds of channels that we don't want to get the good ones.
DirecTV has the channels we want on the lower tiers. I have the Choice Xtra package. At least I don't have to buy the Ultimate package to get all of our channels.
We do have the HD Xtra (I think $4.99 add'l a month) package.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.
I have not and will not cut the cord. | |
| | | | | | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
EARTH |
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Mar-21 5:10 pm
Re: I fled to satelliteYeah, their bundling is downright bizarre. I would have DirecTV if it weren't for the fact that they don't support TiVo in any meaningful way. I love my TiVos. Hopefully I'll eventually move to MA, one of the requirements for buying a house will be FIOS.
What is TCM? Some junk channel that re-runs a bunch of old movies? It is odd that it's in the sports package though, not bundling in with the garbage in XF Preferred that they shove down your throat to get ESPNU, CBS Sports, a couple of the Discoveries (although those are pretty much garbage channels now anyways), Nat Geo, Smithsonian (some markets), and Al Jazeera America (some markets).
Many people are running them through digital voice. The reliability issue is a problem, although at that point, just pick up your cell phone and use that if there actually is an emergency... We have a security system that we don't use, no landline, no cable phone, and no voip. Just cell phones. It's so nice not to have another obnoxious phone ringing. | |
| | | | | | | IowaCowboyIowa native
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1 |
Re: I fled to satelliteIn Mass if you call 911 on a cell phone it goes to the state police who has to transfer it to the responding agency and you still have to give the address. Cell phones transmit the location but not all PSAPs receive that data and they have to contact the carrier for that info. Landlines don't have that problem. And landlines don't have the problem with dead batteries or power outages.
FYI: FiOS is only in Eastern Mass and not in metro Boston.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.
I have not and will not cut the cord. | |
| | | | | | | | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
EARTH |
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Mar-22 11:27 am
Re: I fled to satelliteI'd probably grab my cell phone anyways in an emergency. I know it's not in Boston proper, but most of the better areas around Boston have it. | |
|
| | | |
forsure to BiggA
Anon
2014-Mar-20 5:46 am
to BiggA
I agree | |
|
|  maartenaElmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:5 |
to IowaCowboy
That is not cord-cutting though. Sure, it may come in without a cord, but it is still a traditional TV service. I just cancelled DirecTV, and going with full internet services only. DirecTV: $110 for 3 TV's. Netflix: $8 Hulu Plus: $8 Amazon prime: $99 a year, but say $8 a month. Overplay SmartDNS so I can access BBC iPlayer, Australian, NewZealand, and Canadian TV on Demand, as well as many other countries: $5. Total cost a month: $29 - and I will probably cancel one of the 8 dollar services because of so much overlap. Savings: $80 a month. Oh, I can still receive about 20 channels over the air, many in HD, and I use a media center PC to record things from those channels. $80 x 12 = $960 saved a year, so even if you had to invest in a couple of ROKU devices and a media center PC, you'd see savings in less then a year. So yes, SHOVE IT DirecTV, Cable, U-Verse, whatever.... I don't need 200 channels of SHIT, when I only watch 10-15 channels. --
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" | |
| | | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
EARTH |
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Mar-20 6:28 pm
Re: I fled to satelliteThose numbers look great, except for the fact that they aren't comparable services. Try watching breaking news on CNN, or March Madness games without cable. Not going to happen. | |
| | | | maartenaElmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:5 |
maartena
Premium Member
2014-Mar-20 7:50 pm
Re: I fled to satellitesaid by BiggA:Those numbers look great, except for the fact that they aren't comparable services. Try watching breaking news on CNN, or March Madness games without cable. Not going to happen. With Overplay SmartDNS I can watch live streams of BBC World News, the International version of CNN through Zattoo, and on live.cnn.com they almost always open up their stream when breaking news is happening. The International version of CNN multi-casts the USA prime time (because its in the middle of the night in the European HQ where the International version broadcasts from), and copies US breaking news when it happens. So absolutely no problem, and CNN International (Just like BBC News) offers a lot better coverage of actual news. CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News are all three poor deliverers of actual news. They are more interested in political discussions, slamming the OTHER political side then the ones they support, etc.... its all opinion pieces, and talking heads that scream at eachother. No offense, but when news is no longer interesting enough to the USA, CNN will just put up talking heads again, when CNN International will continue broadcasting ACTUAL news. So for people that want to watch NEWS, instead of opinionated hosts slamming political sides and/or talking heads debating stuff, cord cutting is a winner. Because MOST cable/satellite outlets don't have CNN International, BBC News, and also don't have Russia Today, Al Jazeera English, and Euronews, all of which I can see using Overplay SmartDNS. Sure, RT, and AJ may be considered opinionated themselves, but it is refreshing to see the news from a NON-American point of view sometimes. Sports, you are absolutely right. If you are a sports lover, cordcutting is probably not for you. I don't care about sports much, and the sports I do care about, I can get online. --
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" | |
| | | | | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
EARTH |
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Mar-21 5:14 pm
Re: I fled to satelliteAl Jazeera America is really good, unfortunately, my system is a 650mhz system, hasn't been upgraded in forever, so I don't get it. There's Rachel Maddow on MSNBC, who does excellent analysis of political stories, and sometimes I just want CNN coverage.
As far as cutting the phone line, that's why the good systems use outside-facing sirens. | |
|
| | | | |
to BiggA
said by BiggA:
Try watching breaking news on CNN,
Don't watch news, and have not in decades.. don't care.. doesn't effect me. said by BiggA:
or March Madness games without cable. Not going to happen.
Don't watch sportscrap.. don't care... and I don't like subsidizing sportscrap welfare for others.. so pulling the plug on pacakges which include ESPN is in the future... I've droped once already... further is needed... --
1311393600 - Back to Black.....Black....Black....
Want health care? Get a job! No to ACA! No to USNHS or USHIP or anything like them!
Job = Benefits = Health care, simple. | |
| | | | | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
EARTH |
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Mar-21 5:16 pm
Re: I fled to satelliteI have needed ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, CBS Sports, SNY, CBS, TNT, TBS, TruTV, and BTN so far this season to follow my teams and watch others in March Madness. Not giving up anything except BTN anytime soon (only one game this year was on it). | |
| | | | | | maartenaElmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:5 |
maartena
Premium Member
2014-Mar-21 8:23 pm
Re: I fled to satellitesaid by BiggA:I have needed ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, CBS Sports, SNY, CBS, TNT, TBS, TruTV, and BTN so far this season to follow my teams and watch others in March Madness. Not giving up anything except BTN anytime soon (only one game this year was on it).
Yes, if you are a sports fan you will remain a slave of the cable industry, no matter how much money they will want from you. And that makes me ponder.... is there figure attached to what you WILL pay for sports? Sports is a major contributor of making television expensive, with many cable/sat providers tacking on "regional sports fees" and moving channels into more expensive sports packages. DirecTV has increased its fees with about $5 a month steadily for the last 4 years (including a regional sports fee), so what cost me $90 4 years ago, costs me $110 now, and I didn't even subscribe to a sports package. No doubt, the price of Netflix and online service will also increase. But cable has really seen higher and higher prices. When the economy crashed in 2008, the cable/sat companies were one of the few ones that continued to raise prices. This of course has everything to do with the channels continuing to demand more money for their channels. When is enough enough? How much money would you pay a month to keep your sports? $150? $200? $250? --
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" | |
| | | | | | | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
EARTH |
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Mar-22 11:28 am
Re: I fled to satelliteI don't know. Probably a lot. Depends on who I'm living with and where. Right now I have three roommates, so even if the Comcast bill was $200+, we'd still keep it since we're splitting it four ways. | |
|
| | | | |
to BiggA
said by BiggA:Try watching news-prevention on CNN Fixed that for ya - your original text wasn't meant to be truthful statement.  | |
|
|  cork1958Cork
Premium Member
join:2000-02-26 |
to IowaCowboy
If you have Comcast for HSI, why in the world are you still paying those professional rip off artists at Verizon for phone? Why haven't you gone with Vonage or Ooma or something similar. Definitely much cheaper than Verizon! Myself, I'm trying to learn the in's and out's of what would be the best way to cut the cord. I'm not a tv watcher and probably wouldn't even own one if it wasn't for the wife. The price of even expanded basic is totally absurd for what kind of garbage is on it every night! --
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects ··· amonkey/ | |
| | | IowaCowboyIowa native
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1 |
Re: I fled to satelliteI have a security system that depends on dial tone for connecting to the monitoring station and I want a solution that doesn't depend on premises power since the alarm panel has a battery. | |
| | | | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
EARTH |
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Mar-20 6:30 pm
Re: I fled to satelliteIf you got Comcast Digital Voice, even though it's a total POS, it would barely cost you anything, as you could bundle it with your internet. It, unlike VOIP services, works with security systems, and you could get a UPS if the built-in battery life isn't enough. | |
| | | | | IowaCowboyIowa native
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1 |
Re: I fled to satelliteI'm not going to trust a life safety system on a VoIP connection. I get an insurance discount for the alarm and I'm sure the insurance companies require either a traditional phone line or a wireless connection. I'm too cheap to install wireless due to the installation costs and additional monitoring fees. Plus I want real E-911 that goes to my local dispatch and doesn't have to be routed through the state police to local dispatch.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.
I have not and will not cut the cord. | |
|
| | | maartenaElmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:5 |
to IowaCowboy
said by IowaCowboy:I have a security system that depends on dial tone for connecting to the monitoring station and I want a solution that doesn't depend on premises power since the alarm panel has a battery.
Most alarm companies sell a wireless solution. Basically a "cell phone type device" that is installed in the attic, or somewhere high up. If your cell phone has reception in your house, this device will also. The advantage is that it will work when power is off (for as long as the battery lasts, which is a few days to a week since the device is pretty dormant unless it needs to call out to the alarm company - it will last longer then any battery on the alarm system itself) but MOST importantly: They can cut your outside phone line all they want, but the alarm company WILL be notified. Most burglars know what they are doing. They will cut the hard line FIRST, then break in. They will jump into your backyard, find where the phone lines come in, and cut them. Then they take it easy and break in your house. You may have an audible alarm, but before a neighbor actually wakes up and calls 911, your burglar is long long gone. You are actually fooling yourself if a POTS dialtone is going to protect your house, because it won't. Ask your alarm company to upgrade you to a wireless device. They will charge you for it, probably $5-$10 a month more, but it is worth it. Because a burglar won't be able to find a device buried in your attic before they break in.  --
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" | |
| | | | | IowaCowboyIowa native
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1 |
Re: I fled to satelliteI'm one of the fortunate ones where my phone line is buried and the NID is in the basement. The only exposed section of phone line is a three inch section and you have to go looking for it but I'm not going to give too many hints.  | |
|
swarto112
Premium Member
join:2004-02-17
Brookfield, WI  ·Time Warner Cable
|
I cut the TWC cable in JanI can get 80 channels OTA and can rrecord on my Tivos. I can stream everyhting else via Roku's, Apple TV, and smart TVs. Heck even got a login toanother large cableco from a relative if I really feel the need to watch something. But tell ya the truth no one cares and even noticed at my house. The 11 yr old was streaming everything via Roku and iPad anyways. And the few shows the wife had time to watch was OTA anyways. | |
| | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
EARTH |
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Mar-19 7:31 pm
Re: I cut the TWC cable in JanI.e. 5 OTA channels, some junk channels, and a ton of subchannels. | |
| | | swarto112
Premium Member
join:2004-02-17
Brookfield, WI ·Time Warner Cable
|
swarto112
Premium Member
2014-Mar-20 10:24 am
Re: I cut the TWC cable in Jani.e. 20 OTA channels, some junk channels, and a ton of network subchannels....i.e. a slimmed down version of what you pay for on cable.
Always love it when the right fighters hop on...the discussion was about usable content not correcting me. I.E. I can get what I need from OTA or streaming. | |
| | | |
•••
| silbaco
Premium Member
join:2009-08-03
USA |
silbaco
Premium Member
2014-Mar-19 7:19 pm
Smaller ProvidersAgain, they need to take into account small providers to see the real picture. There are hundreds. Centurylink gained over 60k alone last year. | |
| MTU
Premium Member
join:2005-02-15
San Luis Obispo, CA |
MTU
Premium Member
2014-Mar-19 7:19 pm
Cut the 'cord'For two plus years I been using Charter cable for Internet access only, and watching 'T.V.' using a Roku box.
The other 'net options here are At&t DSL, or satellite.
The content from the Roku options satisfy my interests, and actually provides access to more in-depth world news, entertainment options, as well quality 'tech' info. | |
|  tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:7 |
tshirt
Premium Member
2014-Mar-19 7:30 pm
I would agree......people are cutting back on CATV but subscribing to HSI at even higher rates.
Changing services isn't exactly cutting the cord. | |
| |  NormanSI gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12 |
Re: I would agree..said by tshirt:....people are cutting back on CATV but subscribing to HSI at even higher rates.
Changing services isn't exactly cutting the cord.
You are being too literal. I have not, ever, in my life had a pay TV service; nor will I ever. I had Internet service for at least ten years before giving Netflix a spin. And if the content Moguls and Taikuns have their way, by jacking up the cost of video streaming, I will happily dump the streaming services. --
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum | |
|
 NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny Yours
MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
kudos:1 ·ooma
·Xfinity
|
Still just a drop in the bucketWhat people don't realize is when you do the math, just a small percentage of people are cutting the cord. With 94,000,000+ people paying for TV, 100,000 people is just a drop in the bucket. The reasons why it hasn't caught on more? Lack of easy to use, free, and legal options is one. Another would be lack of legal sports programming that is streaming out there. Sure, ESPN3 is online, but when you look a majority of the programming, it isn't available unless you have pay TV. So while there are people here who will pound their chests and claim how cool it is to be away from pay TV, the simple fact of the matter is that the majority won't be doing it anytime soon. Make no mistake about it, pay TV is a luxury item and when times are tough, people will ditch it. A bulk of the numbers you see here from people dropping pay TV are people doing just that. Some will switch to legal means and OTA. Others will go to illegal streams. Either way, the content providers will be forced to drop prices if more people find it hard to afford the bill. --
My domain - Nightfall.net | |
| |
••• | BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
EARTH |
BiggA
Premium Member
2014-Mar-19 7:35 pm
A fringe phenomenonCord cutting is great for people who didn't really watch TV in the first place. It will eventually bottom out, if it hasn't already.
Most people, however, actually do watch some TV, and if they do, they won't cut the cord. All these various streaming solutions are pretty much half-baked as a cable replacement. They are really a supplement to cable, as they don't have a lot of the programming (like sports) that cable does. The simple fact of the matter is that as long as the content is on cable, people will pay for cable. I don't foresee the ability to purchase most of what is on cable separately anytime soon.
Cable is very secure, as U-Verse isn't that credible of a threat, and few areas have FIOS. In many areas, the cable provider is a monopoly provider of internet, so through their shady anti-competitive de-bundling surcharges, they are able to push satellite out to a large extent, and even if everyone switched to DirecTV tomorrow, with the de-bundling surcharge and internet, the cable companies would make plenty of money. | |
| |
•••••••••••••••••••••••• | | |
Mountain - molehillThere are probably more people commuting to work by bicycle this year than there were cord-cutters. These headlines are funny, .1% is ALIVE AND WELL. Come back and see me in 678 years when the final corded customer bites the bullet. | |
| | | |
anon_anon
Anon
2014-Mar-20 6:07 am
Re: Mountain - molehillIf cord cutting is not a problem and just .1% , then why in other threads have you indicated that cord cutters and netflix users represent such a problem that ISPs must implement usage caps and massively raise prices to compensate. So which is it? Cord cutters an infinitesimal problem or the imminent doomsday for the industry? | |
| | |  ·Verizon FiOS
|
Re: Mountain - molehillHey I have a fan, would you like my autograph ?
My reference was just poking fun at the headline title, I was actually expecting much higher numbers than that. You dont actually believe I sat down and worked an equation which resulted in 678 years, do you? That was supposed to just translate into SLOW PROCESS.
doomsday for the industry? Its an assortment of cumulative problems that will eventually lead all ISP's to metered billing. The industry faces no doomsday, simply not a fan of what the result will be. You do know that some ISP's already have CAPS, right? | |
|
| |
You cannot deny the future forever.........."CORD NEVERS" are THE future. | |
| ·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
|
good and bad marketswho would've thought people would pay $4 for a cup of coffee when you could buy it for as low as 25 cents when Starbucks first opened. I wonder if this is what got the oil companies thinking about their current nature of "price gouging".
the pricing and delivery model (cable-tv subscriptions) for video will fall out of favor with consumers eventually and given the slow rate of change, these subscription numbers will make a trend towards younger consumers going it alone or to alternatives (both paid and unpaid)
consider this; the average person's free time in the 80s was much longer than it is today... and the couch potato epidemic is mostly gone to fleeting moments of watching shows people are "hooked on". the 6 or so cable channels most people watch is transitioning to limited station loyalty and more loyalty to the actual content which can be gotten for free via bittorrent, or streaming websites. similarly, software piracy groups chose mainly the most popular content to release (going back decades).
amid this kind of evolution, it is not surprising Comcast wants to get bigger to get in front of this kind of problem by becoming the gate keeper for a larger portion of the last mile. nevertheless becoming larger in and of itself doesn't solve this problem... you only have to look at AT&T as proof.
all raising prices and acting like a bully against the consumer got this industry is backlash against monopoly incumbency and google going into minor and major markets of Kansas and Austin with eyes on bigger prizes. | |
| | |
Small number of folks, but lots of talking about it!Reminds me of 10 years ago when folks started using cellphones and dropped landlines, everyone, said it was the granola types and nothing to worry about. Now, with under 45s its common. My guess with pay TV is on the same trajectory when folks realize whats available OTA, how easy it is (and legal) and really ask what channels do you watch?
There was a study that after folks got over the endless web content, they tended to only return to 10-15 sites. I watched only 2-3 channels on pay TV, and now see them on Netflix or Roku. At first its kind of weird, but now it seems weird not to watch TV this way. | |
| |  fg8578
join:2009-04-26
Salem, OR |
fg8578
Member
2014-Mar-20 12:02 pm
Re: Small number of folks, but lots of talking about it!Agreed. People said the same thing about VoIP substitution and even called it "cord cutting" (i.e., dropping their landline). Now look at the POTS numbers. Only about 60% of people still have a POTS landline compared to the year 2000. Pay-TV cord cutting may be minor now, but I suspect it will follow the same trend as VoIP and wireless. | |
| | maartenaElmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:5 |
to codydog
said by codydog:There was a study that after folks got over the endless web content, they tended to only return to 10-15 sites. I watched only 2-3 channels on pay TV, and now see them on Netflix or Roku. At first its kind of weird, but now it seems weird not to watch TV this way.
I'm finding also that my TV habits simply change. Instead of having to program the DVR ahead of time of stuff I want to watch, I don't have to think about it, remember anything.... its more like: I want to watch TV, what shall we watch tonight? I have, in a nutshell, thousands of DVR's available to me and I don't have to think about recording anything. I also don't have to fast forward through commercials every flipping 10 minutes when watching a movie. I found I had 200+ channels on DirecTV, and I end up recording stuff from about 10 channels at most, 3 or 4 of em I can still get for free OTA. It started making sense to just get an antenna, build my own DVR for those channels, and Netflix/Amazon/Hulu everything else. I did just dump Hulu because of the commercials, but Netflix gets me most I need. --
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" | |
|
Tomek
Premium Member
join:2002-01-30
Valley Stream, NY |
Tomek
Premium Member
2014-Mar-20 7:52 am
SMART TVsAnother good reason to dump cable subscriptions.
Many new TVs come with suport for netflix/amazon/youtubue and many other services I never heard about.
Once premium content providers start offering more direct IPTV service/subscription to complement OTA, what would be the point of bulky setup box embedded with re transmission fees.
I think in next decade, cable TV will get similar shake up like 'music' industry
--
Semper Fi | |
| |
••• |  nunyaLXI 483
MVM
join:2000-12-23
O Fallon, MO
kudos:13
|
nunya
MVM
2014-Mar-21 1:05 am
You have to be committedExcepting internet service, I cut the cord. It's just too expensive. Add in all the converter boxes (8) and B.S. fees - you are looking at $120 for "basic" cable.
I cut the cord and survived. Let me tell you, the decision did not make me a popular guy around my house.
Today, I don't really think anyone in my family truly misses cable. We have 4 Roku boxes, a Wii, an Xbox, a smart TV, MythTV with OTA, tablets, cellphones, laptops...
I do pay for Netflix and Amazon Prime (I would have it any way for shipping). I paid for a PlayOn lifetime subscription.
No, you can't channel surf. You have to know what you want to watch before you watch. It makes you plan your TV watching.
The biggest obstacle to cord cutting is the cable companies and content providers doing everything in their power to make it painful and difficult to do.
You have to be committed to being a cord cutter. I'd say we've 'learned' to do 80% of out TV viewing on OTA or MythTV (DVR).
I won't lie and say that I've never considered going back to cable or satellite. Who knows? Maybe I'll hit the lotto one day.
I do know that there is less TV time around my house. More reading, playing, working, and being productive - in general. That's probably not such a bad side effect.
I'm not one of these pretentious goofballs that goes around bragging about not watching TV or not letting their kids watch TV. For all the evils that come with TV, there's a lot of good too.
--
If someone refers to herself / himself as a "guru", they probably aren't. | |
|
| |
|
How about .. |
·
·
·
