Update on Cord Cutting (Cable TV) 2017 - 2020

[timo2]

Netflix will be more and more reliant on original content that they pay to produce.

Netflix recently purchased a production movie studio in New Mexico. Here is an article about it https://www.abqjournal.com/1230755/netflix-to-buy-abq-studios.html

So Netflix is like a cable TV package of 200 channels and you might watch 10, maybe 20 regularly. Similarly, how many of the dozens or maybe hundreds of Netflix shows are you going to watch season after season?

I see the current trend as the media industry trying to recreate the old three OTA channel scheme from the old days. Disney will only show disney content; AT&T/Direct TV will only show their content; Netflix will only show their content; Apple will...etc etc. The problem is this is now Pay TV, not advert driven OTA!!

 

[explanade]

But right now, Netflix and maybe Hulu has as much content as dozens or maybe hundreds of channels.

They may spend over $10 billion a year in content if they haven't already. That's as much of a budget as several cable networks spend combined probably. Including HBO and Showtime.

 

[audreyh1]

Might bear repeating.

If you only have/use on TV, using a streaming package like YouTube TV, PS Vue, Hulu w Live may not save you much over cable/satellite.

But if you're a family or household with multiple TV's, YTTV, PSV, Hulu will allow you watch 3 simultaneous streams, still for $50/mo or so. With cable/satellite, IME you'll pay considerably more to setup 3 TV's - even if you only watch one at a time.

I'm sure costs will converge somewhat, but that will take a while and we've saved almost $600 since Feb 2018 with PS Vue. And when they converge, the prices will be higher than todays streaming packages, but lower than todays cable/satellite.

-----------------------------------------------

I'm more concerned with the direction content providers are going than the battle between streaming vs cable/satellite. It might become even more expensive to have all the channels you'd like as Disney, Viacom and others keep content to themselves. Or situations like Netflix cutting off Apple. But who knows...

Well, it looks like YouTube TV, which I didn't understand but now see is providing channels originally available on traditional cable. This content is not of interest to me, so I'm glad I did not subscribe.

It appears as if content providers who are streaming traditional cable content are going to be aggressive about returning to traditional cable pricing.

Netflix hasn't cut off Apple. Oh, you mean the Apple TV app? Well, that's minor for me. Netflix knows better than to mess with Apple hardware even if they don't play with Apple aggregator software.

 

[easysurfer]

Netflix just raised our monthly Premium 4 plan from $12.99 to $15.99. Looks like a 30% increase.

Yes, keep an eye on the price creep of cutting the cord .

You can run but can't hide.

Don't want to get caught cutting the cord but end up paying just as much or more than if just stuck with cable.

 

[robnplunder]

Are we all replacing the hard cord (dish, cable) with soft cord (Hulu, Netflix via Wifi/internet)? I "replaced" $70+ dish subscription with 3 different on-line TV services. In addition, I had to by faster internet speed. I still saved money in doing so but the gaps may be closing between the hard and soft cords. Did I mention Netflix is increasing its price?

 

[Chuckanut]

Cutting the cord works if you don’t watch much of the Extras that the more complete cable packages come with. I don’t give a hoot for ESPN, HBO, Disney channel etc., so I save a bundle.

 

[steelyman]

Update on Cord Cutting (Cable TV)

My Hulu account is set to go on pause for 12 weeks starting this week. Even though the price is dropping, I don’t think I watch it enough to justify keeping it going.

That’ll leave me with Prime, Netflix, Sling, and OTA reception. My usage pattern seems to be mostly OTA “live broadcasts” coupled with scheduled recording to a really basic DVR-like device.

Still have a number of DVD/Blu-ray discs but streaming is winning that war at my home. I’ve donated a bunch but kept several hard-to-find titles.

 

[Z3Dreamer]

Are we all replacing the hard cord (dish, cable) with soft cord (Hulu, Netflix via Wifi/internet)? I "replaced" $70+ dish subscription with 3 different on-line TV services. In addition, I had to by faster internet speed. I still saved money in doing so but the gaps may be closing between the hard and soft cords. Did I mention Netflix is increasing its price?

A few years ago before I cut the cord, I was paying $211 including 1/12 of Amazon Prime, Netflix and, of course, my cable bundle. Now, $145 covers it all. Now, the monthly savings are $66. Hardware that I purchased was maybe $600, but I recovered that, years ago.

Monthly savings were greater a while ago but I splurged. For a long time, I had no live streaming, only OTA, Netflix and Amazon Prime. During that time my monthly cost was $40 lower. Monthly savings were over $100.

 

[Midpack]

Yes, keep an eye on the price creep of cutting the cord .

You can run but can't hide.

Don't want to get caught cutting the cord but end up paying just as much or more than if just stuck with cable.

If you only have 1 TV, you won’t save as much and this is a legit consideration.

If your household has 3 or more TV’s (even 2) and want to watch more than one program at a time, it’s no contest - cable/satellite costs at least twice as much as cord cutting with comparable channel lineup and features. Pricing may converge, but it’s going to be a long time, and it will be less than cable/satellite would have risen to without cord cutting competition. They’re already scrambling to find ways to offer better price packages. We’ve saved over $600 since Feb 2018 while others waited...

And don’t get suckered by cable and satellite teaser rates. With installation, fees, taxes and other “extras” it’ll be more. And after a year you’ll see what it really costs.

 

[UnrealizedPotential]

To me a large part of streaming services and continual rising prices of other pay TV providers is the cost of the various channels themselves to make their content available. ESPN, and other pay networks , too many to list, demand a certain amount of money from the providers in order to have access to their channels. The cable TV providers know what sells, and what viewers want. So they charge enough to cover their cost and charge more on top to make a profit and raise it as high as they can get away with.

Is it worth it? I guess it just depends on what you want and what you are willing to pay for it. I want the Destination channel and the American Heroes channel, but those are always on the last and most expensive tier. I'm not going to pay it, when I have to pay $25 more a month just to get 20 more channels and only watch 2 of them. I have cable TV and the Satellite TV companies are no cheaper. I've looked. It is what it is. You either pay the price or don't get it. I get enough. Each person has to make their own choice regarding this and live with it.

 

[pb4uski]

For 3 TV's at our house, Dish Network satellite was $96/mo with significant discounts versus $50/mo for PS Vue - comparable channel selection, picture quality, DVR, simultaneous streams. I don't doubt I could get close to $50/mo with Dish Network if I only had 1 TV.

We have 4 TVs and Dish's skinny Welcome Pack programming and our total bill was only $65/month as of last Oct... currently on seasonal hold so I don't know what it currently is.

 

[pb4uski]

....Dish keeps trying to push the Hopper on me but I don't want to pay another $7/month for each additional TV when I have a solution that works.

I tried DishAnywhere and using a Fire stick to watch on the other TVs but it's choppy and buggy. I don't recall exactly but it seemed like once I tried to stream, I could no longer use the remote. IF it worked well that would be another solution to limit the Dish equipment charges with multiple TVs.

We have a Hopper with 4 TVs... it is a double-edged sword. We love it that any TV on property can access the same guide and DVR so controlling any TV on property is the same... I'm not keen on the $40/month cost for this functionality.

We have used DishAnywhere extensively and it works well for us. Interesting idea to use DishAnywhere as a substitute for additional equipment, but I'll just pay the extra $7/month or whatever it is for the convenience that Joey gives us.

 

[Dawg52]

And don’t get suckered by cable and satellite teaser rates. With installation, fees, taxes and other “extras” it’ll be more. And after a year you’ll see what it really costs.

I got a quote from Comcast with all the fees and taxes added in. My first bill came in right on the button(I was surprised). Got a 2 year deal and they told me the only thing that could go up was a regional sports fees. And sure enough.....those did go up by a couple of bucks after a year. So I have been happy. Having said that, I will probably go with Sling Orange and OTA when the contract is up. Right now I am watching the Masters on antenna because the color and picture is a tad better than cable HD. Crazy. I also like Hula and Showtime so with that added, I won't be saving a lot. But will have what I want..... which is the main thing.

 

[RonBoyd]

For those that don't need the most current TV offerings there is always the Free channels (free assuming you have internet service already):

https://flixed.io/free-streaming-services/

Cord-cutting is all about saving money. The cost of cable has skyrocketed in the last few years, so cancelling cable and using internet TV services, as well as streaming services like Netflix, Hulu and Amazon Prime has never been a better idea.

But if you’re finding that you need to trim your budget even more, you may be wondering if there are any free streaming services available to you. The good news is that today, there are more completely free streaming services than ever.

So to help you save a buck or two, while still getting all of the TV, movies and other content you need, we’ve put together a list of the top [20] free streaming services below. Take a look now, and see what your options are for watching free TV, movies and more.

(My emphasis.)

 

[zinger1457]

And don’t get suckered by cable and satellite teaser rates. With installation, fees, taxes and other “extras” it’ll be more. And after a year you’ll see what it really costs.

I've been switching between Dish and DirecTV for over 20 years and my current rate is $61/mo for DirecTV's XTRA package. I've never paid the retail price so I'm a little skeptical of the cost savings many cord cutters claim to be making.

 

[RunningBum]

while still getting all of the TV, movies and other content you need

(My emphasis.)

How is it that you or the writer of the article think you know what content I need (want)?

 

[RonBoyd]

How is it that you or the writer of the article think you know what content I need (want)?

We come from a long line of mind-readers.

 

[explanade]

Live sports are what keep me from cutting the cord. They make me watch at specific times whereas every other show is from DVR recordings or on demand or streaming.

I could save a lot of money but maybe I spend $50-100 more by keeping a pay-TV package?

Been paying that for decades and I'm not accumulating any more so I don't see giving it up.

 

[explanade]

Saw an article about the recent Youtube TV price increase from $40 to $50.

At $40, Youtube was losing maybe $10 a month per customer and they had over a million customers.

But they wanted that data.

They cut a deal to get a package of channels for $2 a month and increased prices by $10.

They still lose a couple of dollars but it's a lot better than before.

Now they have to hope people won't cancel in droves because of the higher price for channels which they probably don't think are worth it.

The media companies which own several channels or cable networks will not sell them individually. That is how we end up with a fraction of the channels that we watch regularly.

 

[bUU]

How is it that you or the writer of the article think you know what content I need (want)?

That is part of the whole cord-cutting mythos: Either you see it as the panacea its advocates are making it out to be or there is something wrong with you. I am hoping that an apples-to-apples comparison will still yield some cost savings for cord-cutters, but the recent increases are making clear how accurate has been that which I've been saying all along - that there is an early adopter advantage that folks better capitalize on quick because it'll soon be gone.

 

[timo2]

Live sports are what keep me from cutting the cord. They make me watch at specific times whereas every other show is from DVR recordings or on demand or streaming.

I could save a lot of money but maybe I spend $50-100 more by keeping a pay-TV package?

Been paying that for decades and I'm not accumulating any more so I don't see giving it up.

+100
I had to upgrade my Dish Flex package to the 120 package so I could watch the NHL playoffs. Also, the AT&T sportsnet that has the Rockies is only on major providers, not on hulu etc. Last year when I dropped AT&T sportsnet and went with MLB one team, I needed to add VPN to watch it (which I needed anyway for public wifi), so the MLB cost came out the same as the Dish regional sports pack.

Don't be fooled: the media industry accountants have everything figured out. The only way to really save money is to go OTA and maybe one streaming service like Netflix. Once we want to start seeing the various 'cable' style channels, the bean counters will get you.

 

[Cobra9777]

That is part of the whole cord-cutting mythos: Either you see it as the panacea its advocates are making it out to be or there is something wrong with you. I am hoping that an apples-to-apples comparison will still yield some cost savings for cord-cutters, but the recent increases are making clear how accurate has been that which I've been saying all along - that there is an early adopter advantage that folks better capitalize on quick because it'll soon be gone.

I posted an apples-to-apples comparison in post #1567. The hardware rental costs and add-on fees still make traditional cable significantly more expensive for my situation. Plus I think streaming is simply a better service. So even if the cost was the same or slightly more, I'd stick with streaming for all the reasons in the post I linked to.

 

[Midpack]

Live sports are what keep me from cutting the cord. They make me watch at specific times whereas every other show is from DVR recordings or on demand or streaming.

Not sure I’m following this. We have 17 dedicated sports networks and all the majors (ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox) and cloud DVR for $50/mo with PS Vue. We can watch almost any sports event live or on DVR...

 

[Midpack]

That is part of the whole cord-cutting mythos: Either you see it as the panacea its advocates are making it out to be or there is something wrong with you. I am hoping that an apples-to-apples comparison will still yield some cost savings for cord-cutters, but the recent increases are making clear how accurate has been that which I've been saying all along - that there is an early adopter advantage that folks better capitalize on quick because it'll soon be gone.

Unlike you, you’re always objective, there’s something wrong with all of us. It’s not even close for multiple simultaneous TV households - most families of even couples who watch different programs at the same time. For them PS Vue, YouTube TV, Hulu Live, and DirecTV Now are about half the price. Comparable channels and features at our house with 3 TV’s was $96/mo (with a slimmed down channel lineup a new sub would never see) vs $50/mo for PS Vue.

Since your fond of apples to apples comparisons - show us a cable or satellite subscription with 60+ HD channels including majors, for 3 TV’s including DVR for $50/month - make sure it includes all the extra equipment charges, fees and taxes and after the teaser rate. You don't even have to factor in no-contract.

It’s only close if you’re 1) basically a single TV household, 2) you wouldn’t have internet service without TV, and/or 3) you’re using OTA and some elaborate switching scheme beyond mainstream TV audiences to share a cable/satellite signal (which violates your cable/satellite agreement BTW).

 

[audreyh1]

Going from cable to streaming has been half price or better for many years now even with upgrades to significantly higher internet speeds.