Leichtman: 170,000 Net TV Additions in 2012 Cord Cutting Still Just an Adorable Little Trickle According to the latest data from Leichtman Research, the top nine largest cable companies lost 1,415,000 video subscribers in 2012 -- compared to a net loss of about 1,600,000 subscribers in 2011. Time Warner Cable fared the worst of all cable operators, losing 525,000 video subscribers on the year. The significantly larger Comcast lost 336,000 subscribers on the year. The good news (for pay TV execs in general, anyway) is that most of those users are headed to satellite TV and phone TV services and not Internet video services. The top telephone providers added 1,300,000 video subscribers in 2012, while satellite TV companies added 288,000 video subscribers in 2012. Phone and satellite providers have been more aggressive in launching new DVR functionality like Hopper, or redesigning their GUI's to be more cutting edge (like Verizon's FiOS TV upgrades. Cable operators also continue to take a heavier beating when it comes to customer satisfaction rankings. By technology, the top nine cable companies lay claim to 51.3 million video subscribers, satellite TV companies have 34.1 million subscribers, and the top telephone companies currently serve 9.3 million subscribers. Collectively, the thirteen largest pay TV operators saw 170,000 net pay TV additions in 2012, though that net total is 230,000 net subscribers smaller than in was in 2011. A recent Nielsen report noted that 5% of all TV viewers (about 5 million people) currently watch TV without a traditional pay TV subscription. These numbers collectively help further cement TV executive opinion that they don't have much to worry about financially from cord cutters -- yet. Granted the cable and broadcast industry go to immense lengths to ensure that alternatives to pay TV remain constrained through lawsuits, content licensing restrictions, broadband usage caps and other tactics, so that alternative video growth is hamstrung shouldn't come as much of a surprise.
|
  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Wonder how much greater cord cutting would be If content providers actually offered their content online without people having to pirate it? And if OTA wasn't so hit an miss with many people. My guess it would be a lot more than a trickle. | |
|  | KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | Re: Wonder how much greater cord cutting would be not only offer it online but offer it without any regional restrictions. it is 2013, Regional waiting periods are made obsolete by The Pirate Bay. And forcing people to wait even a week is pretty much saying "We know you are fans of the show, Just avoid the fan sites until it shows in your country as well as any internet forums with people who may like the same types of shows you do."
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Wonder how much greater cord cutting would be Well this article is pretty much about the US so what goes on in other countries is not really germane to the topic. | |
| | | | KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | Re: Wonder how much greater cord cutting would be Maybe so but the whole point is the content owners completely ignore the internet as a medium.
Interesting fact I found out is that CBS does not license its shows that are still running to streaming providers. Seems they prefer people to pirate them.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| | Cord Cutting I got rid of cable about one year ago. | |
| | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Cord Cutting A bit easier to do in Tampa where you can get all the major networks with an antenna without much issue. | |
| | | | | Re: Cord Cutting Same with Los Angeles | |
| | | | | I never tried that, maybe I should purchase some bunny ears. Any suggestions on which kind of HD antenna I should purchase? | |
| | | | | | | | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Cord Cutting You live in a completely different area what works for you may not apply to him. different station different frequencies. you live in a mountainous area. Tampa is pretty flat, different atmospheric conditions etc etc | |
|
| | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by brianiscool:I never tried that, maybe I should purchase some bunny ears. Any suggestions on which kind of HD antenna I should purchase?
No such thing as an HD antenna. that's just marking crap. An antenna is an antenna. One from 30 years ago will work. Heck you can make one form coat hangers if you're up to it.
Bunny ears wouldn't work to well since many stations are UHF. Though most of the major network stations in Tampa are on VHF-Hi. Bunny ears with the loop on it might. Depends on your location and if you have housing materials that might affect reception such as stucco. Those should be around $10 or so. Do not get one that's amplified. You're probably too close to the stations for those and that would overload the tuner. If your $10 antenna doesn't work you can just take it back.
I also assume you have a TV that has a digital OTA tuner in it. Pretty much and HDTV that has come out in the last 4 years has one.
Go here and put in your address. it's hidden and post a link to the results
»www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=29 | |
|
| | TV I've never been able to get anything other than satellite except for the first time this year from my telco. I would give consideration to subscribing if there was something to watch. | |
| Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Ugh When DirecTV and Dishnetwork started in 1995 and 96, did people refer to this as CORD CUTTING? Because thats a helluva lot closer to cord cutting than people moving to FiOS and Uverse from cable.
Lets start talking about cord cutting when the pay-TV industry LOSES subscribers quarter after quarter. | |
| | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Ugh To me cord cutting is no longer subscribing to pay TV. Be that cable, satellite, U-verse, Fios.
Actually they are losing subscribers because the US households are growing at a rate of 250,000 per quarter so if the pay TV industry is only gaining 170,000 that's not even keeping up with population growth. | |
| | | Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Ugh Understood, but we're talking about almost 100,000,000 subscribers to begin with. Properly put, "cord cutting" is in fact a "trickle".
Again, when there is an industry-wide net-loss , then we can take it more seriously. Me, Id be embarrassed if I had visitors at my house and I didnt have any TV service. Before being branded as "smart" , one would be labeled as CHEAP or in financial trouble. As if someone would take their TV savings and buy stocks and bonds instead lol | |
| | | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Ugh My original point if one could get access to HBO or ESPN or other channels online, how many would have "cable"? | |
| | | |  LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by ITALIAN926:Again, when there is an industry-wide net-loss , then we can take it more seriously. Me, Id be embarrassed if I had visitors at my house and I didnt have any TV service. Before being branded as "smart" , one would be labeled as CHEAP or in financial trouble.
I pay about $150/mo for 25/5 Internet & about 300 cable channels(though I probably only watch about 25 of them in any week). That sounds like a lot, but it really isn't. A dinner out, a movie, drinks afterward for 2 easily runs that amount. Do you go out 2 or 3 times/mo like most couples. Then the monthly cable bill is relatively cheap entertainment. | |
| | | | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Ugh said by Linklist:said by ITALIAN926:Again, when there is an industry-wide net-loss , then we can take it more seriously. Me, Id be embarrassed if I had visitors at my house and I didnt have any TV service. Before being branded as "smart" , one would be labeled as CHEAP or in financial trouble.
I pay about $150/mo for 25/5 Internet & about 300 cable channels(though I probably only watch about 25 of them in any week). That sounds like a lot, but it really isn't. A dinner out, a movie, drinks afterward for 2 easily runs that amount. Do you go out 2 or 3 times/mo like most couples. Then the monthly cable bill is relatively cheap entertainment. Not everyone make $40k a year or more. Some single person making minimum wage would bring home at most $1100 a month after taxes assuming they don't put anything into retirement or have health insurance. $150 is a sizeable chunk especially when one still has rent, utilities and food to still pay for. Not to mention gas, possible car payment, car insurance. | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Ugh Cable tv is not a right. If you can't afford something then you don't get to have it. | |
|
| | | |  Steve MehsGun Control Is Using A Steady HandPremium
join:2005-07-16 | said by Linklist:said by ITALIAN926:Again, when there is an industry-wide net-loss , then we can take it more seriously. Me, Id be embarrassed if I had visitors at my house and I didnt have any TV service. Before being branded as "smart" , one would be labeled as CHEAP or in financial trouble.
I pay about $150/mo for 25/5 Internet & about 300 cable channels(though I probably only watch about 25 of them in any week). That sounds like a lot, but it really isn't. A dinner out, a movie, drinks afterward for 2 easily runs that amount. Do you go out 2 or 3 times/mo like most couples. Then the monthly cable bill is relatively cheap entertainment. Totally agree!
Saturday night a buddy and me went out to Dave & Busters to watch UFC 158. For two meals, two desserts and an appetizer it came to $63 including tax and tip. We each spent $15 dollars in tokens for games and whatnot. Including the cost of gas, we’re talking over $100 between the two of us. I could have just ordered it on PPV for $55, and have him bring over a large pizza and a double order of wings that would have cost $25 and we would have been better off. Not to mention D&B didn’t have the audio on for the fight until GSP and Diaz came into the octagon. It would have been nice to hear the other 4 matches. From now on I’ll just order the matches at home. $55 for a three hour PPV event isn't so bad afterall.
--
Dale Jr, Riding Daddys Coattails Since February 18, 2001!
| |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon FiOS
 ·voip.ms
| It looks like Time Warner fell prey to FIOS. 2+ years ago my neighborhood (14 houses) all had TWC. Then in came FIOS, and it was like the sheriff came town. Only 2 people left on the block don't have FIOS.
On cord cutting: I AM a cord cutter, just not listed as such. I downgraded to 50/25 + SelectHD (the new package) for $75 a month which is coincidentally the SAME price I would have paid if I only had internet (which I wanted). So for the cost of a cablecard ($4) I get over 100 channels, and I don't have to fool around w/ OTA. I personally think it is a great deal, and I don't have to subsidize sports channels. So one would be foolish not to take advantage, and that's the way they price it.
With TWC the package is broadcast (your basic for $17) or ALL the channels (digital) for over $100 (w/ inet). There is no medium ground, and with their kludge SDV boxes I will have no part of them. With them I would have to pay $65 for basic and 20/2 internet. Talk about old skool pricing.
For phone, Anveo takes care of me for $5.
I for one think FIOS is awesome, and with the new SelectHD package I feel for the first time since Harron Cable was around in the 70's ($7 a month), I'm sort of paying for what I use, or at the very least be upset about it.
NOBODY is tracking people like me (only choosing TV because it's essentially free), but I bet if bundling weren't the same price for 1-play vs 2-play the carnage would be much higher. The cable dirty little secret.... | |
| | | | | | Re: Ugh With the carriage fees Verizon has to pay those stations, I can assure you, youre getting the internet "essentially for free"  | |
| | | | | Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon FiOS
·voip.ms
| Re: Ugh I get it. I work in the biz. In my case internet is #1, phone and TV are not even necessary (thanks to netflix and cell phones). I would suspect for most people now Internet is now the anchor product, not TV.
In my case 50/25 was $74.99 (no bundling), but Verizon offered me 50/25 + SelectHD for the same price (+ $4 CC), so in my eyes TV is "free" from a pricing perspective. Yes there are sunk costs, but the point I was making is that if Verizon wanted $100 for the same thing, I would just have Internet. The ONLY reason I kept TV is because they made it cost neutral and it would be more troublesome to get reliable broadcast. In fact Verizon wanted $18 for just broadcast, so if you do the math it doesn't make sense.
The question is whether the $75 for 75/25 is a rip. It certainly is, but that is what it is, and Verizon bean counters have determined that 2-play looks better to investors than internet only. In my case I don't lease rip off boxes, so I am certainly not their most profitable customer, but nonetheless a happy one.
This board tends to beat up vendors, but IMHO Verizon is doing all the right things and is decimating TWC in my area.
Nobody is counting people like my fam, that choose the double play because it makes economic sense, not because of need.
I know you understand what I was saying. | |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| What's more surprising.. Is that
a) FiOS and Uverse combined have as many subs on TV as Time Warner
b) Even more surprising - AT&T Uverse has almost as many subscribers as FiOS. For something that many (on here) said would be a dog with fleas, I'm actually surprised that Uverse has nearly 5 million subscribers - and climbing.
In my area (Los Angeles) , Uverse is as expensive (if not more so) than TWC, requires 1 box/TV (CATV/clear QAM still exists on TWC), and the bundle has 20/2Mbps as the standard/cheapest. AT&T promotes its 6Mbps package  and has caps. | |
| | | | | Reviews:
 ·Frontier Communi..
| Re: What's more surprising.. "AT&T has a larger market penetration than FIOS."
===============
VERY true...Verizon FiOS is NOT available ANYWHERE in the Midwest. (Frontier took over their 1 Midwest market, Fort Wayne, IN, a few years ago.)
AT&T U-Verse is in a number of Midwest cities. Chicagoland is the most notable in numbers of households. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Its only because they can flood a market - not because of demand.
People would in general prefer FiOS to Uverse, but FiOS is not being built out (much) anymore, while AT&T will effectively use any means to push Uverse where it is profitable.
The hardest part of FiOS is the initial cost of building.
With Uverse/FiOS, lower density markets are not that affordable using current technology. If/when AT&T pushes Uverse over LTE (2.6GHz?), they'll probably flood their market better, and be in a position more similar to DTV/Dish. | |
| | |  NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
·Comcast
·Callcentric
 ·Site5.com
| Re: What's more surprising.. said by en103:Its only because they can flood a market - not because of demand.
People would in general prefer FiOS to Uverse, but FiOS is not being built out (much) anymore, while AT&T will effectively use any means to push Uverse where it is profitable.
The hardest part of FiOS is the initial cost of building.
With Uverse/FiOS, lower density markets are not that affordable using current technology. If/when AT&T pushes Uverse over LTE (2.6GHz?), they'll probably flood their market better, and be in a position more similar to DTV/Dish.
Uverse is in hot demand right now as evidenced by over 1 million subs migrating over to it and other related services. At this point, people are tired of cable and want options. I have Uverse in my area, and I can tell you that competition is great. Consumers want it and competition drives the prices down a bit.
I do agree with you overall though. Just pointing out that its not because of market flood.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net | |
| | | | Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: What's more surprising.. Grand Rapids may be a little different than L.A.
Here, just north of L.A., I have the option of Uverse or TWC.
I had AT&T in the past, and they were 'ok'. TWC is 'ok' as well.
If TWC had rates higher than Uverse, I'd switch.
Cable service itself has been 'decent', with few outages.
I've seen a handful of issues with those VRADs around here.
To me, it comes down to my bottom line and overall service itself. Currently in my area, TWC is a little bit better.... maybe AT&T will be better than Uverse next year. | |
| | | | | NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI Reviews:
·Comcast
·Callcentric
·Site5.com
| Re: What's more surprising.. said by en103:Grand Rapids may be a little different than L.A.
Here, just north of L.A., I have the option of Uverse or TWC.
I had AT&T in the past, and they were 'ok'. TWC is 'ok' as well.
If TWC had rates higher than Uverse, I'd switch.
Cable service itself has been 'decent', with few outages.
I've seen a handful of issues with those VRADs around here.
To me, it comes down to my bottom line and overall service itself. Currently in my area, TWC is a little bit better.... maybe AT&T will be better than Uverse next year.
For us, its about the same thing. Really, the quality of the internet is very dependent upon the location. Some areas are great for Uverse, and others suck. Same with Comcast, or TWC, or any other internet provider. Yes, even Verizon FIOS sucks in some places, but I digress....
What is going on here is more of a price war. If you have Uverse in your area, you can get discounted Comcast cable even if you are a long term subscriber. I am sticking with Comcast because the service is solid and I get 50 meg down and 10 meg up with my Blast service. Uverse can only get me about 18 meg down at the most, and I am not close enough to the VRAD for that.
For everyone else, its coming down to price and Comcast has a fight on its hands. Uverse works very well in these areas and it has less to do with just market penetration and more with the fact that the quality of service is very good.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net | |
|
NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI Reviews:
·Comcast
·Callcentric
·Site5.com
| Cord cutting still not common This study just proves that there is a drive to other services. Cable TV subs are moving to satellite and Uverse/FIOS related services. This is not surprising as people want to see their bills go down and the best way to get that is to move to another provider where they can get a price break on new service or starting up service again.
Regular users are not cutting the cord because it is not intuitive for them. You want to see mass cord cutting? Here is what needs to happen.
There needs to be a good reliable sports streaming site setup. It has to be legal and easy to use and usable on Roku, PS3, Apple TV, and other streaming sites. It at least needs to be able to get all the local sports as well.
Speaking of which, the amount of streamable shows needs to be increased. Sure, those of us who have cut the cord can use various methods from torrents to other file sharing sites to get our shows, but there are a lot of people who don't want to mess with that.
In short, the apple TV and Roku boxes have made cutting the cord a possibility, but it won't go to reality until just as many programming options are on these boxes including live sports. Until this happens, cord cutting will be only among the technically savvy.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net | |
| | | raise more prices sounds like its time to raise the prices more | |
| | | ka ching 2013 $$ go ahead cable industry, jack up the rates another 20% this year.. let's see those negative numbers grow! | |
| | | And what constitues a "net lose"? Someone who drops premium cable TV at $120/month, keeps basic video for $15/month (not connected to a TV) to get an $18/month discount on the bundled Internet isn't factored into this as a loss, when in reality, it may very well be.
I had this exact situation for years. The bundled rate was cheaper than just Internet alone, and I never had a TV hooked up to it. As soon as that flip-flopped by a couple of bucks per month, I dropped the video, and they practically begged me to keep it. It is numbers twisting for shareholders comfort level.
Funny how the numbers can misleading. | |
| | | Is there an age breakdown? I wonder if there's a breakdown by age groups? If so, are younger people tending to ditch pay TV more than older folks? My guess would be yes, as I know quite a few folks who have either canceled or who never had it to begin with.
And one thing that I can't prove but feel is that there are many people who are right on the edge of giving up traditional pay TV. If there was a decent alternative, they'd be gone in a second. The thing is, many of the traditional media companies have way too much invested in the current model to risk destroying it by offering something new. Why would you offer a product that disrupts the market when you dominate the market? | |
| | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Is there an age breakdown? I have a 17 year old that barely watches any TV. He did start watching Walking Dead and Breaking Bad ironically only after first noticing them on Netflix. Hint hint content providers. He also watches a couple of shows on HBO but watching them on HBOGo. He never watches regular HBO. | |
| | | KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | Re: Is there an age breakdown? said by BF69:I have a 17 year old that barely watches any TV. He did start watching Walking Dead and Breaking Bad ironically only after first noticing them on Netflix. Hint hint content providers. He also watches a couple of shows on HBO but watching them on HBOGo. He never watches regular HBO.
This points to another market content owners miss.
Your kid is not only not using the traditional channels but prefers to watch shows on the device he wants at the time he wants and not when some programming director at a station says the show should be on.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Is there an age breakdown? Really, I'm thinking of anyone under 50, but especially folks in their 30s or under. | |
|
| | Cord Shavers and Cord Nevers The MSOs are aware of all of these trends. A Cord Shaver reduces services, equipment, etc to save money based on the availability of programming online. Cord Nevers are typically under 30 and many have never had a relationship with a Cable, Satellite or Telco provider as they moved out from Mommy and Daddy's place to a dorm and then an apartment while never subscribing on their own. The real issue is that MSO's still have great sway with content providers (or ARE the content provider in some cases). This gives them a ton of leverage in keeping the content you want off the internet unless you have a subscriber relationship with them. You want ESPN? You'll have to subscribe to someone. | |
| |  IowaCowboyWant to go back to IowaPremium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
·Comcast
 ·Verizon Broadban..
| Re: Cord Shavers and Cord Nevers said by StreamCity :The MSOs are aware of all of these trends. A Cord Shaver reduces services, equipment, etc to save money based on the availability of programming online. Cord Nevers are typically under 30 and many have never had a relationship with a Cable, Satellite or Telco provider as they moved out from Mommy and Daddy's place to a dorm and then an apartment while never subscribing on their own. The real issue is that MSO's still have great sway with content providers (or ARE the content provider in some cases). This gives them a ton of leverage in keeping the content you want off the internet unless you have a subscriber relationship with them. You want ESPN? You'll have to subscribe to someone.
Their current model conserves bandwidth. If you can broadcast one stream of ESPN to all the cable receivers, that uses much less bandwidth than a bunch streams of the same program going to the 500 cable modems on the node. Comcast has come up with a solution to that issue with a service called Comcast AnyPlay which uses a router with a built in cable tuner that allows watching of TV programming on iPads, computers, and smartphones without consuming all the DOCSIS resources. It's not available in my area yet and I've been getting the runaround when inquiring about it.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner. They are much better than broadcast TV.
I have not and will not cut the cord. | |
|
Reviews:
 ·DIRECTV
| Who paid for Leichtman Research to do this study? LOL I wouldn't be surprised if the Pay TV Industry provided some of ALL of the funding to make that study. LOL
If you are under 30 you likely haven't "cut the cord" because you never had pay tv service to begin with most likely. Instead all you ever had was the internet and DTV OTA. | |
| |
See 10 replies to this post | |
BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH | Cord-nevers I know a lot of cord-nevers. I want my cord, but a lot of people don't seem to care. I'm wondering if once they settle down to a steady job and get married and such they will get cable TV, or if it's dead to them at this point. | |
| | | Growth? Let the cable companies rest on their laurels with 0.33% growth for 2012. Sounds like the tv industry is ready for a revolution too. | |
| | | KickOutCable.com KickOutCable.com offers cord cutters hep cutting the cable conglomerate cord. It's possible, you have to work a little harder to see the things you want sometimes, but it's generally possible to view all content that's broadcast, over the internet, in one way or another. | |
| elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | Not that hard to figure AT&T offers much better channel lineups for the money; Verizon Fios offers better speed and picture quality. Combined with the massive bribes they offer, its not surprising that a lackluster TWC would see defectors.
However, after a few months, AT&T customers will tire of Pixelvision and PowerPoint posing as HD - or in our case, pay $60 for a PPV boxing match that dies in the 3rd round with 50 friends and family watching. Fios customers will be on their 5th month of billing-roulette, and both sets will be yet waiting for their promised rebates and freebies.
They will begiin to count the days until they can move back. | |
| DonLibesPremium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19 | question Nielsen's figures I question Nielsen's figures. I was a Nielsen participant until they realized I had cut the cord. At that point, they kicked me out of the program. This made no sense. How can they have any clue what cordcutters are watching over the internet if Neilsen doesn't let cordcutters in the program? | |
|
| |
|
|
