Update on Cord Cutting (Cable TV) 2017 - 2020

[Midpack]

Because of the rude responses I get in response to saying so; I figure it is pointless to share a realistic view when the responses are so stubbornly resistant. Regardless, once we get there I predict as much belly-aching about how it "isn't the middle" and how "we're paying more today than we did for cable packages" as we see today about what some think competitors should have done.

Where you define rude as a POV unlike yours.

You’ve been demonstrably wrong for at least 18 months (while we’ve actually saved almost $1000 like millions of others), we’ll see if you’re ever right, but I doubt it. You seem to think price has nothing at all to do with cost, contrary to economics 101.

But obviously we’re both

 

[GTFan]

Is there a reason the cable companies couldn't design and field their own standardized protocol as an industry without a government mandate? Or, does each company maybe still see an advantage in keeping things proprietary (and thereby making it more cumbersome for customers to change providers?)

USB cables/devices are ubiquitous and the government didn't force that standard on anyone.

Apples and oranges - STBs are tied to content payment and control, USB is a simple tech standard for device connectivity.

The major cableCos have absolutely no incentive to create a standard that will easily allow you to switch providers, and they want control over the user experience so they can monetize it.

This is the main reason why I will keep my Tivo setup until Cablecard goes away - I get control over how I use the content, not Comcast. Tivo has claimed that they are working with Comcast on IPTV access but it's been 4+ years since that announcement and nothing has appeared. Comcast just took VOD access away from Tivo without a replacement, too. None of this matters to me as long as Cablecard is supported for access to all the channels I want. I also get VOD via the Roku app, which they haven't started charging for yet (it's been in perpetual 'beta').

 

[samclem]

The major cableCos have absolutely no incentive to create a standard that will easily allow you to switch providers, and they want control over the user experience so they can monetize it.

Yes, I understand that. They want to make changing difficult and expensive ("sticky" in the lingo of the trade).
But they'll have an incentive if that "stickiness" is offputting to enough customers. They'll be stuck with an ever declining pool of customers who must be charged more and more. Right now, cable companies believe their marketing and the knowledge level of their prospective customers can keep the game going for a while longer. I suspect they may eventually regret a shortsighted decision.

 

[ExFlyBoy5]

Just a quick update. We have been using the Amazon Recast with pretty good results, albeit not as many OTA channels I would have liked. Well, the AT&T Directv Now/CBS debacle got me off my arse and I installed a cheap $39 outdoor antenna in our attic.

It took a whopping one hour to install and we now have 55 channels that come in crystal clear.

For those of you on the fence about doing the antenna in the attic route, let it be known that it can help bring in a lot of additional channels.

 

[RonBoyd]

and I installed a cheap $39 outdoor antenna in our attic.

Just out of curiosity, why in the attic and not on the roof?

 

[beowulf]

We purchase an amplified digital TV antenna for indoor use a few weeks ago. It claims a 60 mile range, which is probably exaggerated. We were very surprised that an initial scan locked in about 25 channels in the Phoenix area. After moving it a few feet so it was in front of a window, there were about an additional 10. All the major networks come in great, as well as some channels I never heard of before and didn't have on cable. Obviously this is totally dependent on where you live. But, for about $30, it saved us from renting an extra box for $4.00 a month. Still have cable for those that are not OTA, as well as a DVR. But it might make good economic sense to get a few of these antennas, drop the TV part of the package, just keep internet and use Roku. We do like time shifting so that will be a problem.

Don't see any real alternatives without sacrificing what we enjoy and, at our age, we don't want to nickel and dime things.

 

[jim584672]

My cable company wants $24.99 for broadcast basic. Home made antenna, 69 channels, $0 per month. I love cord cutting.

 

[ExFlyBoy5]

Because it's ugly as hell and didn't want it visible.

Sorry, responding to RonBoyd but Tapatalk didn't include the quote.

 

[Scrapr]

Cutting the cord as of last night. Since Mrs Scrapr passed it really makes even less sense to pay $187/mo. She liked several cooking channels and would DVR daytime talk shows. I wasn't willing to die on that hill to make a change. I have had Sling for about 2 years and like it. Plus Netflix. So going to see if I can do that.

I cancelled via chat with Direct TV. And saved the chat string. She mentioned something about retention calling me. I'm sure they will. I will lie a little and say we are selling the house. (I'm not) and see how aggressive they are. They just said to drop off the equipment at a UPS store of FedEx office.

I feel like I'm jumping off a large cliff. But $187/mo!!! I'll find a way to make it work

DirectTV/AT&T isn't making it easy. E mailed the bill for the entire amount. I have chat saved showing I quit on July 4th. <heavy sigh> This is the stuff that Mrs Scrapr was good at. Dealing with customer service

 

[bUU]

Where you define rude as a POV unlike yours.

That's self-serving nonsense.

You’ve been demonstrably wrong for at least 18 months (while we’ve actually saved almost $1000 like millions of others), we’ll see if you’re ever right, but I doubt it.

So I say something about the future that hasn't happened yet and you say that I am "wrong". Don't you see how screwed up your logic is? Beyond that, we are even seeing the indications of it happening, most notably cord-cutters complaining that their costs are increasing vis a vis cable packages; and the end of net neutrality and providers beginning to leverage that to their advantage (which I predicted, I should say).


What's really disappointing is this ridiculous see-saw you are constructing... building up these irrational expectations about what cord-cutting will offer for the future consumer, and by doing so setting all those duped into believing that nonsense into a false sense of security that will invariably be dashed as time goes on and the reality unfolds.


As I've said a number of times: Take advantage of the early adopter advantage that is available now, because it will eventually vanish.

You seem to think price has nothing at all to do with cost,

No I don't. Only someone blinded by binary thinking, unable to see shades of gray between the black and white, would perceive what I've written that way.

contrary to economics 101.

It is really important to get past the elementary concepts of Economics 101 and come to understand the reality of Economics 301: For discretionary purchases, cost serves as a floor for pricing in some, but not all cases. If you are selling something for less than cost, and cannot justify that loss as a necessary expense for earning a greater amount of profit elsewhere, then you shouldn't be sell that something.



After that, cost has nothing to do with pricing. Anyone pricing a discretionary product on the basis of cost is a sucker. Any business with a snowball's chance of success will have to adopt value-based pricing as their protocol: Pricing products on the basis of how much value those products deliver, regardless of cost.

But obviously we’re both

If you think that all that needs to be said has already been said then why do you keep dredging up your old, tired arguments?

 

[bUU]

The major cableCos have absolutely no incentive to create a standard that will easily allow you to switch providers, and they want control over the user experience so they can monetize it.

Precisely. And that's why that is something that government must do, if consumers are to be protected and not subjected to whatever machinations providers may choose to leverage.

Comcast just took VOD access away from Tivo without a replacement, too.

But Midpack is confident that providers are going to be forced to be more focused on what's best for the consumer! Pardon me while I laugh.

 

[bUU]

But they'll have an incentive if that "stickiness" is offputting to enough customers.

"If."


We're just a bunch of random user handles on the Internet. We don't have vast research departments and access to every last detail about consumer behaviors. They do. What does the actions that they are taking indicate about what they know about us?

Right now, cable companies believe their marketing and the knowledge level of their prospective customers can keep the game going for a while longer. I suspect they may eventually regret a shortsighted decision.

Except, based on the relative level of research foundation underlying their "belief" and your "suspicion", their "belief" is closer to knowledge and your "suspicion" is closer to wishful thinking.

 

[MichaelB]

This thread topic is current and relevant. Please take the snarky exchanges offline or outside or anywhere else and keep the discussion on topic.

 

[GTFan]

Right now, cable companies believe their marketing and the knowledge level of their prospective customers can keep the game going for a while longer. I suspect they may eventually regret a shortsighted decision.

On the contrary, the major cableCos know that TV is a commodity that they are prepared to let go - they make most of their money on HSI access.

We can only hope that new tech like 5G and low-orbit sat internet can provide sufficient competition for that, because it's not going to come from a wired provider.

 

[Jerry1]

Just out of curiosity, why in the attic and not on the roof?

Not only is it ugly, which actually wouldn’t bother me, my understanding is that I can get all the channels I want with it in the attic. In the attic, there is easy access to it should anything go wrong plus, it’s protected from the elements and therefore, less should go wrong with it. I haven’t installed one yet because my cheap one stuck behind the tv is working okay, but in the fall, when the attic cools off, I’ll be up there installing an antenna. No ladder required.

 

[Dawg52]

We can only hope that new tech like 5G and low-orbit sat internet can provide sufficient competition for that, because it's not going to come from a wired provider.

Agree. Competition is our only hope.

 

[RonBoyd]

Not only is it ugly, which actually wouldn’t bother me, my understanding is that I can get all the channels I want with it in the attic. In the attic, there is easy access to it should anything go wrong plus, it’s protected from the elements and therefore, less should go wrong with it. I haven’t installed one yet because my cheap one stuck behind the tv is working okay, but in the fall, when the attic cools off, I’ll be up there installing an antenna. No ladder required.

I understand. I am unsure what is "ugly" about it but will not argue that point.

Anyway, Most of the TV transmission towers in Denver are directly west of us but many are almost straight north. In the attic I was able to access some (but not all) of the west ones but not the north ones -- they are ~50 miles away.

In fact, in order to access all of the channels available within a reasonable distance -- 60 miles -- I had to place the antenna about twelve feet above the roof peak. (FWIW, it is a dual antenna that is set to point west and north simultaneously.)

 

[explanade]

Has anyone had any luck with those amplified indoor antennas?

I don't want to run a long coax from the attic to my TV, which is downstairs.

But there is also a high rise building between me and the direction of the TV transmission towers so I've never had luck with OTA.

In any event, when I look at most of the stuff I record regularly on Tivo, most of them are on cable channels so OTA channels alone wouldn't be enough, though it would get me NFL games live. But most of the local NBA, MLB and NHL games in my area are on the regional RSN, so I'd have to subscribe to cable to get those anyways.

 

[beowulf]

The amplified indoor antennas do work, but the quality of the signal and what you can receive depends on your location, building height, what's between you and the transmitter and if you can place the antenna in front of a window. If you can't get the signal at full strength, you will either get a black screen or bad pixelation. No snow like in the old days. Worth a try, we have one in a spare bedroom and it works. But we still use cable for the non OTA channels.

 

[explanade]

Right but if I'm paying for cable channels, I'm going to get the local network channels too.

 

[beowulf]

Not without paying for a set top box. The OTA antenna is useful in a room without one.

 

[RunningBum]

The amplified indoor antennas do work, but the quality of the signal and what you can receive depends on your location, building height, what's between you and the transmitter and if you can place the antenna in front of a window. If you can't get the signal at full strength, you will either get a black screen or bad pixelation. No snow like in the old days. Worth a try, we have one in a spare bedroom and it works. But we still use cable for the non OTA channels.

No, that's not accurate. If you don't get the signal at good enough strength, you'll get the black screen or unwatchable pixelation. I connect my indoor antenna to my Dish receiver (so I can record), and it shows the signal strength on a scale of 0 to 100 (not sure if that is % or some other unit). Anything 65 or above is the same, except that in storms I'm more likely to lose signal from a station I'm getting a lower signal strength on than higher. 55-65 it can be too choppy to watch. Anything below 55 I don't get anything, and in fact the meter just drops to 0--no signal.

 

[RonBoyd]

No, that's not accurate. If you don't get the signal at good enough strength, you'll get the black screen or unwatchable pixelation. I connect my indoor antenna to my Dish receiver (so I can record), and it shows the signal strength on a scale of 0 to 100 (not sure if that is % or some other unit). Anything 65 or above is the same, except that in storms I'm more likely to lose signal from a station I'm getting a lower signal strength on than higher. 55-65 it can be too choppy to watch. Anything below 55 I don't get anything, and in fact the meter just drops to 0--no signal.

Yes, that is correct. I cannot get a useful signal at less than 65% (and yes, it is percent). And yes above 65% all signal strength produces the same quality reception... that is sound, image, etc.

 

[camfused]

...
I don't want to run a long coax from the attic to my TV, which is downstairs...

Have you looked into wireless TV antennas, such as the Mohu AirWave? This would allow you to place the antenna in the attic (as high as you can, for best signal), yet you do not need to run a coax to your TV.

 

[bUU]

On the contrary, the major cableCos know that TV is a commodity that they are prepared to let go - they make most of their money on HSI access.

It reminds me a bit of when the cellular service providers started charging customers significantly more for service that supported 2G despite how much worse the service quality was. The idea that all customers are worth keeping is a consumerist construct that has no basis in reality.

We can only hope that new tech like 5G and low-orbit sat internet can provide sufficient competition for that, because it's not going to come from a wired provider.

5G is still going to come from many of the same providers - AT&T, Verizon and Sprint, included - so they're going to structure their offerings such that we eventually get back to the steady state in terms of revenue extracted from consumers. If there was to be any chance of competition having any impact on that it would have come in the form of regulators blocking wireline providers from snarfing up almost all the wireless spectrum set aside for 5G, but of course that didn't happen.