Update on Cord Cutting (Cable TV) 2017 - 2020

[bobandsherry]

I think it's more likely that cable will suffer the fate of landline phone service. If the cable companies don't position themselves as streaming companies (like DirecTV Now) they will eventually disappear.

Cable or streaming all end up using the same line.... so not much change for cable companies who have already started to make their move.... Comcast has XFinity TV, Charter has Spectrum TV, Frontier has Frontier TV, etc.

 

[aja8888]

I think it's more likely that cable will suffer the fate of landline phone service. If the cable companies don't position themselves as streaming companies (like DirecTV Now) they will eventually disappear.

We need the cable companies for internet bandwith. I have experience with Hugh's Net satellite internet service and it wasn't reliable or consistent. Comcast, AT&T and others are not going away anytime soon.

 

[mpeirce]

We need the cable companies for internet bandwith. I have experience with Hugh's Net satellite internet service and it wasn't reliable or consistent. Comcast, AT&T and others are not going away anytime soon.

The cable companies definitely will be in for the long haul as internet providers.

Still, there is some possible competition on the horizon:

1. 5G from the cell companies may work for many people - though the only companies that people dispose almost as much as the cable companies are the mobile companies like ATT and Verizon.

2. There is is also SpaceX's StarLink. It's satellite based, but since it's a huge constellation of low earth sats rather the sats way up in geosynchronous orbit the delays are much diminished. Of course, it's more of a technological stretch than 5G. But it's got a decent chance of getting rolled out (they already have FCC approval).

 

[bUU]

The way things are shaping up with the subscription viewing and streaming services, sooner or later, cable will be less expensive.

Precisely. The market seeks its balance point, and the claims that cable customers are paying too much for what they are getting has always been nonsense. Once early adopter benefits dissipate, these new distribution channels will settle into comparable pricing, because pricing is, always has been, and shall always be, a reflection of what customers are willing to pay for this discretionary purchase.

I think it's more likely that cable will suffer the fate of landline phone service. If the cable companies don't position themselves as streaming companies (like DirecTV Now) they will eventually disappear.

Which would break most subscribers' streaming service, since it rides on the cable company's Internet service. Besides the fact that most cable systems are run by companies that have their nascent own streaming services already, as bobandsherry pointed out, folks like Comcast have got themselves more than adequately covered, both by benefiting from increasing use of Internet bandwidth and from licensing fees for the content they own.

The cable companies definitely will be in for the long haul as internet providers. Still, there is some possible competition on the horizon: 1. 5G from the cell companies may work for many people - though the only companies that people dispose almost as much as the cable companies are the mobile companies like ATT and Verizon.

Both of whom are already effectively cable companies (U-Verse and FiOS), and both of which face competition from whatever Comcast and Charter eventually cook-up to compete with the big guys' 5G services.

2. There is is also SpaceX's StarLink. It's satellite based, but since it's a huge constellation of low earth sats rather the sats way up in geosynchronous orbit the delays are much diminished. Of course, it's more of a technological stretch than 5G. But it's got a decent chance of getting rolled out (they already have FCC approval).

And remarkably, after the early adopter effect dissipates, it'll end up costing the same as cable costs today. Imagine that!

 

[bobandsherry]

And remarkably, after the early adopter effect dissipates, it'll end up costing the same as cable costs today. Imagine that!

I could probably take a position that it will end up costing MORE. Today, content suppliers such as Comcast, Charter, Dish, Direct, etc, all have leverage to get the "best" pricing from each provider group. Individuals won't have that leverage and could see costs going up in total.

I'm sure then one would argue that the advantage is people have a choice in channels and can manage their costs better. But once the providers consolidate you'll be back to picking packages with many channels you don't "want" for a small list of channels you "need". A "need" of 12 channels may extend across 5 providers of a hundred or more channels.

 

[marc515]

Cable companies have one great advantage; we need them to deliver the content. They will eventually start charging us for data usage like the phone companies do.

 

[Midpack]

Precisely. The market seeks its balance point, and the claims that cable customers are paying too much for what they are getting has always been nonsense. Once early adopter benefits dissipate, these new distribution channels will settle into comparable pricing, because pricing is, always has been, and shall always be, a reflection of what customers are willing to pay for this discretionary purchase.

And remarkably, after the early adopter effect dissipates, it'll end up costing the same as cable costs today. Imagine that!

I wholeheartedly agree the market will equalize, but I don’t understand your last assertion, the price should be lower at least inflation adjusted. I’d expect prices will be higher than today’s streaming drop in services but lower than today’s cable/satellite prices. They’ll be driven down because streaming services have significantly lower fixed costs - no equipment and no field tech/installation.

 

[bobandsherry]

Cable companies have one great advantage; we need them to deliver the content. They will eventually start charging us for data usage like the phone companies do.

Need today, but technology advancement with service like 5G could make cable companies irrelevant. Doubtful that step to 5G will be the dagger, but what will the next iteration bring?

 

[bUU]

I wholeheartedly agree the market will equalize, but I don’t understand your last assertion, the price should be lower at least inflation adjusted. I’d expect prices will be higher than today’s streaming drop in services but lower than today’s cable/satellite prices. They’ll be driven down because streaming services have significantly lower fixed costs - no equipment and no field tech/installation.

First, only suckers base prices on cost. The companies we're taking about aren't suckers, whether we're taking about Cable companies, isps, or streaming services. Prices are properly based on value. Despite claims to the contrary, Cable television has always delivered value commensurate to the prices it charged even though customers whined about paying.

And value delivered via Cable = value delivered via streaming.

Second, even looking at cost: Think of it this way: Cable television = content + infrastructure. Clearly content = content, so that's a wash. So the comparison is between Cable infrastructure and the infrastructure necessary to deliver streaming services. Infrastructure = infrastructure. Also a wash.

Need today, but technology advancement with service like 5G could make cable companies irrelevant. Doubtful that step to 5G will be the dagger, but what will the next iteration bring?

And after the early adopter bonus dissipates, 5G will impose a convenience premium.

 

[tomc5179]

Tell me more about the guide. Who supplies it? Cost? How easy is it to let the Channel Master Stream+ which channels you get so as to get the right guide channels?

I just got mine the other day. No cost for the guide. It is supplied through Android TV / Google. Plug in your Google credentials and do the channel scan and that's all there is to it. Still learning about it, but it's great so far!

 

[Number3Red]

Got rid of Direct TV, $170 per month to get the tier that has Golf Channel.
Went to YouTubeTV, $37 per month - all the channels we need (lots of sports channels) and we can watch from any device.

Great savings, although I see that Direct TV now has a $10 per month promotion for a streaming service. Not sure how long that is for or how much it goes up after the promotion. Just don't trust them not to slowly raise the rates over the years (that's what happened with our former contract with them).

Good move. I did the same exact thing last month and I am very satisfied, not to mention saving $130/mo. We use a Roku box to watch YoutubeTV and its like we never even cut the cord. Plus with the Roku, we position the Netflix and Amazon apps right next to YoutubeTV and the kids are using them a ton. We are finally getting our money's worth from these other subscriptions as well.

 

[CaptTom]

...Prices are properly based on value. Despite claims to the contrary, Cable television has always delivered value commensurate to the prices it charged even though customers whined about paying.

And value delivered via Cable = value delivered via streaming.

Second, even looking at cost: Think of it this way: Cable television = content + infrastructure. Clearly content = content, so that's a wash. So the comparison is between Cable infrastructure and the infrastructure necessary to deliver streaming services. Infrastructure = infrastructure. Also a wash.

And after the early adopter bonus dissipates, 5G will impose a convenience premium.

Since we're really just speculating and/or philosophizing here, there's no right or wrong answer. But my math is a little different from the above.

In most places, cable was (and in many, still is) a monopoly, and the entertainment (movies, sports, scheduled TV programs, etc.) it delivered was considered a necessity by many customers. They could literally charge almost whatever they wanted, and the majority would pay. "Value" was not part of the equation.

Every part of that has changed. Customers now have many options for movies. A scheduled TV line-up is almost a thing of the past, as people binge watch what they want, at their convenience. 30- or 60-minute shows are no longer the only format. 6-minute YouTube videos are popular. Customers have lots of options. I think we'll finally get to see where viewers perceive the real value. My prediction is, for anyone growing up in the post-cable era, it'll be nothing like the past.

I think 5G may well be the tipping point for the "ubiquitous networking" previously only found in science fiction. It could become the foundation technology on which everything else is built. The distinction between phone and internet will go away. Costs will be driven by normal market forces, assuming no-one can gain a monopoly, and so should be much less than cable. Not to mention not having to string and maintain wires on poles will probably reduce infrastructure costs dramatically.

 

[Midpack]

First, only suckers base prices on cost. The companies we're taking about aren't suckers, whether we're taking about Cable companies, isps, or streaming services. Prices are properly based on value. Despite claims to the contrary, Cable television has always delivered value commensurate to the prices it charged even though customers whined about paying.

And value delivered via Cable = value delivered via streaming.

Second, even looking at cost: Think of it this way: Cable television = content + infrastructure. Clearly content = content, so that's a wash. So the comparison is between Cable infrastructure and the infrastructure necessary to deliver streaming services. Infrastructure = infrastructure. Also a wash.

And after the early adopter bonus dissipates, 5G will impose a convenience premium.

Since we're really just speculating and/or philosophizing here, there's no right or wrong answer. But my math is a little different from the above.

In most places, cable was (and in many, still is) a monopoly, and the entertainment (movies, sports, scheduled TV programs, etc.) it delivered was considered a necessity by many customers. They could literally charge almost whatever they wanted, and the majority would pay. "Value" was not part of the equation.

Every part of that has changed. Customers now have many options for movies. A scheduled TV line-up is almost a thing of the past, as people binge watch what they want, at their convenience. 30- or 60-minute shows are no longer the only format. 6-minute YouTube videos are popular. Customers have lots of options. I think we'll finally get to see where viewers perceive the real value. My prediction is, for anyone growing up in the post-cable era, it'll be nothing like the past.

I think 5G may well be the tipping point for the "ubiquitous networking" previously only found in science fiction. It could become the foundation technology on which everything else is built. The distinction between phone and internet will go away. Costs will be driven by normal market forces, assuming no-one can gain a monopoly, and so should be much less than cable. Not to mention not having to string and maintain wires on poles will probably reduce infrastructure costs dramatically.

Good rebuttal.

And though content is a wash, infrastructure certainly isn't. Sales reps, central tech support and content delivery infrastructure between cable/satellite and streaming may be comparable, but cable/satellite have receivers, repeaters, dishes PLUS the armies of field installation and service peeps that streamers don't. I still contend pricing will fall somewhere between today's lower streaming prices and the much higher cable/satellite prices, at least inflation adjusted. But we'll see as this all plays out...

 

[CaptTom]

Good rebuttal.

And though content is a wash, infrastructure certainly isn't. Sales reps, central tech support and content delivery infrastructure between cable/satellite and streaming may be comparable, but cable/satellite have receivers, repeaters, dishes PLUS the armies of field installation and service peeps that streamers don't. I still contend pricing will fall somewhere between today's lower streaming prices and the much higher cable/satellite prices, at least inflation adjusted. But we'll see as this all plays out...

Thanks, and you are probably correct. My own bias is the belief that people are willing to spend too much on what I consider low-value entertainment. People are unlikely to change to suit my preferences, and smart businesses will take advantage of that. They'd be foolish not to.

 

[kgtest]

Thanks, and you are probably correct. My own bias is the belief that people are willing to spend too much on what I consider low-value entertainment. People are unlikely to change to suit my preferences, and smart businesses will take advantage of that. They'd be foolish not to.

I don't value TV as I do say going to a movie. Big games are exciting to watch on TV for me, but only the local sports teams, olympics and some bigger country music awards. All the sitcoms, news and reality isnt appealing to me.

We get away with a $15 HD netflix subscription we share with Dad, a $60/month cable bill and a $10/month usenet subscription to download movies/ TV shows that DW "missed" or doesn't receive between Netflix, OTA and such.

When we travel, I bring my Roku with sometimes it works on the hotel TVs, otherwise those usually have a good cable package and DW does some binge watching on shows she's "missed".

For $930 a year we watch all the TV we have time for.

I do have a state of the art theater, 114" HD Projector Screen, and a very high end Onkyo receiver pushing 18 speakers (including 2 subs) hooked up to a Nuc PC that basically streams any HD Content I want, plus I ran an antennae up to the roof so I can have football parties down there.

I have the ultimate experience right in my basement. This saves us money going to movies, as the creature comforts of home often out weigh the hassles of the theater. But we do see the top 2-3 blockbuster films in the theater each year on the DLP XL and then catch a couple of low budget Tuesday matinee price movies for "date night" occasionally.

This setup has worked well for us.

 

[txtig]

DW and I are three weeks into an eight week RV trip to the western US. My plan for keeping up with a little TV watching was to utilize our streaming services (PS Vue, Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc.) using a combination of campground WiFi and our T-Mobile One-Plus unlimited cell phone accounts (with Hotspots). I have Fire Sticks attached to the TV’s in our motor home. At times, it has worked fabulously. But, in areas with weak cell phone coverage, we’ve had less success. One thing I have learned is that Netflix and Prime can still stream pretty well even with a weaker signal, but PS Vue may not be watchable (too much freezing up) over the same signal. I don’t know why PS Vue requires a stronger signal, but it would be nice if their service could match Netflix/Prime in terms of streaming quality. Last night, I tried watching the Rockets basketball game on TNT through Vue. It wouldn’t work. Switched over to the TNT App on Fire Stick and got a watchable stream.

 

[mpeirce]

When we travel, I bring my Roku with sometimes it works on the hotel TVs...

I noticed that at some Marriott properties they now let you log into your streaming services on the hotel room TV.

You can watch your own Netflix account (and certain other streaming services, I forget which ones). When you check out, they wipe clean all account info from the device.

 

[Perryinva]

It bases your channel guide on your zip code which you enter in. You could take the device on the road anywhere with a flat antenna and just re enter a new zip. Then you could record a game or whatever and watch at your convenience. The device is about the size of 3 hockey pucks stacked. It does require wifi or wired internet in order to have the guide, but no bandwidth for that. To use the streaming services requires more of course. I haven’t figured out how yet, (it wa ls mentioned on a cord cutter forum) but supposedly you can add the live channels that are located on apps like Pluto and Hulu and they show up in the guide as well, which would be very convenient. I repurposed a 3 year old USB 3.0 750gb WD My Passport external hard drive for the dvr and it works perfect. A new 1 TB Passport is only about $55. I didn’t even bother with the microSD card. A nice feature (or shortcoming) is if you select a series, it will display all instances that will occur on that channel for the next 14 days, with a season and episode number. You then can select exactly which ones you want to DVR to avoid duplicates. If you already have two shows on two channels chosen at the same time, then it skips allowing any choice of addional channels for that slot. Once there are more compatible apps for it on Google play, like Netflix and DirectTVNOW, it will be a very competitive device.

BTW, I don’t suppose you are the same Z3Dreamer from the BMW Z3 forum on Roadfly are you?

 

[Marita40]

Seeing this everlasting thread, I'm reminded to post an update. I cut the cable in January 17 and have never looked back. A $10.00 rabbit ear antenna brings in nearly 30 channels in my urban area. But I also found that cutting the cable cut down hugely on my TV watching (natch) since there's "nothing on" the majority of these channels. A month ago I decided to re-do the room where the TV is and downsize the TV to a 24" (from 32"). Now I have even less incentive to watch it, and if I do want to watch I can move the little thing easily from room to room.
It is all good. I am reading a lot more these days than watching the boob tube. Honestly it really is a wasteland (IMO) and the ads drive me crazy.

 

[Midpack]

DW and I are three weeks into an eight week RV trip to the western US. My plan for keeping up with a little TV watching was to utilize our streaming services (PS Vue, Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc.) using a combination of campground WiFi and our T-Mobile One-Plus unlimited cell phone accounts (with Hotspots). I have Fire Sticks attached to the TV’s in our motor home. At times, it has worked fabulously. But, in areas with weak cell phone coverage, we’ve had less success. One thing I have learned is that Netflix and Prime can still stream pretty well even with a weaker signal, but PS Vue may not be watchable (too much freezing up) over the same signal. I don’t know why PS Vue requires a stronger signal, but it would be nice if their service could match Netflix/Prime in terms of streaming quality. Last night, I tried watching the Rockets basketball game on TNT through Vue. It wouldn’t work. Switched over to the TNT App on Fire Stick and got a watchable stream.

I didn’t know that, and wondered why - since we’re exclusively PS Vue. I don’t know, but found this possible explanation?

While Netflix and Prime may possibly have some better algorithms for auto bandwidth adjustment, I suspect something else at play here.

There is a huge difference in trying to stream something live vs a recording. During live events, data is streamed at a somewhat constant rate with just enough buffer to account for small network inconsistencies. With a recording, you can buffer a lot of data. Packets that arrive late, out of order or even lost are not a big deal. When you are doing streaming live, there are tolerances in these where the data is just lost if it exceeds the thresholds.

Try to think VoIP and your phone calls. You could have a really fast connection, but if there is latency and jitter, the calls still sound like crap.

Try streaming some other live events (NHL, NCAA basketball, etc...) to see how this works for you - I suspect you will see the same issues. The NCAA tourney is coming up and you can usually stream this for free.

So, it may be possible that you won't get a good service from PS Vue, Sling, etc. with your current network connection.

Maybe not conclusive but we have had live PS Vue broadcasts “stall” on us occasionally for a few seconds (though thankfully it resumes where it left off vs skipping the lost seconds), but I don’t recall any PS Vue DVR or On-Demand program stalling on us yet. And PBS Passport hasn’t stalled on us yet. Maybe live vs recorded does matter?

OTOH, YouTube buffers from time to time, so maybe other factors.

 

[Midpack]

And your cord cutting trivia for the day.

We’ve found nothing consumes bandwidth like an iOS update from Apple, that must use all available bandwidth without throttling. We can run two TV’s and a mobile device (iPad/iPhone) or two without problems usually. But if we’re doing an iOS update on even one iPad, TV will surely struggle.

 

[Sojourner]

Honestly [TV] really is a wasteland (IMO) and the ads drive me crazy.

+1 to the ads being truly awful, but -1 to TV being a wasteland.

I tend to agree with the broad, critical consensus that we are in a "golden age" of television which started roughly around the time The Sopranos first premiered on HBO back in 1999. The quality of shows available today is generally very high, although there's undoubtedly a lot of awful dreck out there, too. Shows like Mad Men, The Sopranos, The Wire, Deadwood, Six Feet Under, Breaking Bad, Lost, and Fargo, along with many others, have set a new standard for excellence that is resulting in more and more high quality TV shows premiering every year. There are so many great shows just on Netflix alone, I could easily spend an entire year just watching the most critically acclaimed ones that I've saved in my "watch later" list.

Modern ads, though, are a completely different story. Virtually every show that I watch routinely, I watch the DVR'd version so I can skip the ads, but occasionally I have to suffer through some of them. They are about as brain-dead and vapid as one could imagine, pandering to the absolute lowest common denominator of popular culture. Most of them are so cringe-worthy, it makes me wonder how anyone could actually find them even slightly compelling. I really don't think I could ever stomach going back to the pre-DVR days of TV watching.

 

[Dave J]

I've been reading this thread forever it seems, and today semi cut the cord. I've been with Charter(Spectrum) for a long time and have jumped around changing plans, packages to get a "deal" every year or two when they would deal. My current package with phone,TV and Internet was going up to $181.88 from $150.50. This was 2nd year pricing. 1st year was $124.95. All with all taxes.I signed up for the Spectrum TV Choice app package for $32.99 plus tax and internet is now $54.99. There was much confusion in my local office to get me signed up, with incorrect pricing given at first(told 24.99 when it was 32.99 for existing TV customer). I was going to give up phone anyway, so my bill going forward would have been about $162+/-, but it should be $89.80 ($32.99 TV, $54.99 internet plus taxes)for next 2 years. I picked 10 channels from a list of 55 or so, and really only 4 would have been OK with me, plus all local channels and on demand of channels and locals. Will report back with results in a month or so. Learned about the unadvertised package on this thread, so thanks for everyone contributing.

 

[Midpack]

+1 to the ads being truly awful, but -1 to TV being a wasteland.

I tend to agree with the broad, critical consensus that we are in a "golden age" of television which started roughly around the time The Sopranos first premiered on HBO back in 1999. The quality of shows available today is generally very high, although there's undoubtedly a lot of awful dreck out there, too. Shows like Mad Men, The Sopranos, The Wire, Deadwood, Six Feet Under, Breaking Bad, Lost, and Fargo, along with many others, have set a new standard for excellence that is resulting in more and more high quality TV shows premiering every year. There are so many great shows just on Netflix alone, I could easily spend an entire year just watching the most critically acclaimed ones that I've saved in my "watch later" list.

I'm in the 'TV is mostly a wasteland these days' camp, but your post points to why the difference of opinion. We only have network and cable TV (it's expensive enough without adding other packages), we don't subscribe to any of the strictly on-demand streaming services. Network and cable drama, reality and comedy shows are 95% formulaic and predictable from a mile away IME - or "dreck" as you say. IIRC none of your examples of good TV are on network or cable TV, they are all content from on-demand only services. Maybe we need to drop network/cable and just watch PBS, Netflix, HBO and/or Prime or some similar lineup. If it wasn't for sports, DIY and documentaries mostly, and maybe some select news, there is so little on network and cable that we care about -perhaps the time has come. Worth thinking about for us...

 

[radioman42001]

It bases your channel guide on your zip code which you enter in. You could take the device on the road anywhere with a flat antenna and just re enter a new zip. Then you could record a game or whatever and watch at your convenience. The device is about the size of 3 hockey pucks stacked. It does require wifi or wired internet in order to have the guide, but no bandwidth for that. To use the streaming services requires more of course. I haven’t figured out how yet, (it wa ls mentioned on a cord cutter forum) but supposedly you can add the live channels that are located on apps like Pluto and Hulu and they show up in the guide as well, which would be very convenient. I repurposed a 3 year old USB 3.0 750gb WD My Passport external hard drive for the dvr and it works perfect. A new 1 TB Passport is only about $55. I didn’t even bother with the microSD card. A nice feature (or shortcoming) is if you select a series, it will display all instances that will occur on that channel for the next 14 days, with a season and episode number. You then can select exactly which ones you want to DVR to avoid duplicates. If you already have two shows on two channels chosen at the same time, then it skips allowing any choice of addional channels for that slot. Once there are more compatible apps for it on Google play, like Netflix and DirectTVNOW, it will be a very competitive device.

BTW, I don’t suppose you are the same Z3Dreamer from the BMW Z3 forum on Roadfly are you?

How do you use the repurposed hard drive as a dvr? Thanks in advance for your help