Another nail for Cable TV's (all bundled subscription) coffin?

[Midpack]

Netflix, Hulu and now HBO. And millennials are cutting the cord way more aggressively than our generation. I just need to convince DW, I'm ready!

What HBO's Web-Online Subscription Will Mean for Cable Cord Cutters

If you’ve been considering cutting the cord to your cable-TV subscription, HBO may have just handed you the scissors. At Time Warner’s investor meeting Wednesday, CEO Richard Plepler announced that beginning in 2015, HBO will offer a standalone online service, allowing broadband customers without cable TV to subscribe.

But however this particular deal works out, this is a potentially exciting development for TV viewers tired of watching their cable packages swell into bloated, gold-laden barges of tied-together offerings topping $200 a month. If big player HBO sees that it can offer a cable-free package and survive, that may lead the way for companies in other pricey TV sectors–live sports, for instance–which you’ve had to agree to buy a giant cable package to get.

 

[Senator]

I think the sports teams are more nervous. Allowing someone to opt out of the sports channels will take a huge chunk away from the TV contracts.

If it wasn't for TV revenue, there would be a very limited amount of money to pay the outrageous sums for sports salaries.

 

[audreyh1]

Are they going to charge an arm and a leg? Their series available for purchase via iTunes are very expensive which is why I haven't bothered.

 

[rodi]

I'll continue to wait till after the season ends and watch the show on Amazon Prime.

 

[hausfrau]

I'd be happy to cut the satellite, but DH still wants TV available somewhere. Our bill is about $100/mo. The actual satellite costs aren't that bad, but there are about $40 in extras (DVR, HBO and HD reception).

We currently have wireless internet. It's 6 mbps and pretty cheap (around $20/mo.). However, it's not fast enough to stream HD video during the peak hours. What's the alternative? Comcast? Won't that be just as much?

We are waiting for a local company to install fiber. Once they do, we can get 25 mbps for $30/mo. or 50 mbps for $40. Our neighbors a block over have it, but we do not yet.

 

[audreyh1]

I'll continue to wait till after the season ends and watch the show on Amazon Prime.

Right, I also have that option now. But not two years ago when I looked at the pricing structure.

 

[hausfrau]

Netflix, Hulu and now HBO. And millennials are cutting the cord way more aggressively than our generation.

I was at the drugstore the other day I overheard a conversation between a couple of girls around 12 or 13. They were commenting that they watch Youtube beauty and fashion channels when they are bored.

 

[Midpack]

Are they going to charge an arm and a leg? Their series available for purchase via iTunes are very expensive which is why I haven't bothered.

The $64K question. But like many/most, we never watch about 80% of the [-]garbage[/-] "channels" in our satellite/cable "package." If we could subscribe to just the networks we actually watch/want, it's hard to believe they'll collectively charge more than the total satellite package cost. The networks know that obviously, so it must be in their internet pricing calculus (if not, demand will quickly fix their pricing). It would seem a great opportunity for popular networks to increase revenue while net reducing costs to consumers. And if some of the less popular networks fail, that's as it should be.

Neflix, HBO and others are one thing. As everyone knows, if ESPN ever breaks with cable/satellite subscription, the dragon will truly be unleashed. While there are powerful forces protecting the network status quo, cord cutters continue to increase, so the old model will break down sooner or later...

 

[photoguy]

I was at the drugstore the other day I overheard a conversation between a couple of girls around 12 or 13. They were commenting that they watch Youtube beauty and fashion channels when they are bored.

I'm embarrassed to admit that I've actually watched 1 or 2 unboxing videos on YouTube for some gadget in which I was interested.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[photoguy]

I wonder what the average markup the cable companies use on content they purchase? I suppose that cutting out the middleman could result in substantial savings.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[Meadbh]

I'm embarrassed to admit that I've actually watched 1 or 2 unboxing videos on YouTube for some gadget in which I was interested.

Why be ashamed? There's a lot to learn on YouTube, and it isn't all about cats!

 

[audreyh1]

Neflix, HBO and others are one thing. As everyone knows, if ESPN ever breaks with cable/satellite subscription, the dragon will truly be unleashed. While there are powerful forces protecting the network status quo, cord cutters continue to increase, so the old model will break down sooner or later...

Yes - they are pretty much doomed. People are cutting cable left and right, and that's without all the content available that easily could be.

 

[W2R]

I'm embarrassed to admit that I've actually watched 1 or 2 unboxing videos on YouTube for some gadget in which I was interested.

I have watched several unboxing videos. AND, over the years I have watched quite a few Let's Play videos too! (for video games).

However, since I stopped my cable TV service, I find that I have no desire to get HBO or anything else that I don't already have OTA, whether it is for free or for pay. I know, what's wrong with me?

I just don't have time for more TV! Life is a bowl of cherries and mine is overflowing. Too much fun to be had, and not enough time.

 

[REWahoo]

Here's another one trying to cash in on the cord-cutting movement: CBS launches expansive digital subscription service - CBS News

 

[Chuckanut]

I think the sports teams are more nervous. Allowing someone to opt out of the sports channels will take a huge chunk away from the TV contracts.

If it wasn't for TV revenue, there would be a very limited amount of money to pay the outrageous sums for sports salaries.

+1

I understand that most cable customers pay $4-5 a month for sports channels even if they never want them and don't watch them.

 

[Chuckanut]

We are waiting for a local company to install fiber. Once they do, we can get 25 mbps for $30/mo. or 50 mbps for $40. Our neighbors a block over have it, but we do not yet.

When the phone company put fiber into my neighborhood they made the mistake of charging premium prices to get it - $70 a month for internet only, going up to $100 a month after the first year's special deal was over. Needless to say, most people did not sign up.

However, they seem to have seen the light. Last year I signed up for 3 years at $40 a month, no contract. I can also get it with TV for $ 70 a month, but since I live in a good reception area, I get TV for free, OTA.

 

[RonBoyd]

Of course, CBS doesn't want to be left behind:

Watch and Stream CBS Shows Live - CBS.com

 

[robnplunder]

I'd be happy to cut the satellite, but DH still wants TV available somewhere. Our bill is about $100/mo. The actual satellite costs aren't that bad, but there are about $40 in extras (DVR, HBO and HD reception).

We currently have wireless internet. It's 6 mbps and pretty cheap (around $20/mo.). However, it's not fast enough to stream HD video during the peak hours. What's the alternative? Comcast? Won't that be just as much?

We are waiting for a local company to install fiber. Once they do, we can get 25 mbps for $30/mo. or 50 mbps for $40. Our neighbors a block over have it, but we do not yet.

HD streaming needs 12 mbps at minimum. 25 mbps will be plenty for you. $30/mo seems very reasonable.

I can't cut satellite b/c of one channel that DW can't live without - The Golf Channel. It's included in the top family package and is costing me $75/month. If it isn't for the channel, I will drop satellite now.

My new TV is a smartTV and I can stream it instead of resorting to laptop/tablet. Plus, our eye sights are getting worse so we are stuck with large screen TV.

 

[ziggy29]

I understand that most cable customers pay $4-5 a month for sports channels even if they never want them and don't watch them.

The flip side is, a lot of people are *only* still subscribing to cable or satellite because that's where all the sports are.

 

[audreyh1]

HD streaming needs 12 mbps at minimum. 25 mbps will be plenty for you. $30/mo seems very reasonable.

I can't cut satellite b/c of one channel that DW can't live without - The Golf Channel. It's included in the top family package and is costing me $75/month. If it isn't for the channel, I will drop satellite now.

My new TV is a smartTV and I can stream it instead of resorting to laptop/tablet. Plus, our eye sights are getting worse so we are stuck with large screen TV.

We have 10mbps Internet and we stream HD just fine at 1068i. I think we even did pretty well at 6mbps.

 

[FIREd]

HBO just handed me the scissors indeed! I have been pushing to get rid of cable TV for a while but DW could not live without HBO. Snip snip!

 

[robnplunder]

We have 10mbps Internet and we stream HD just fine at 1068i. I think we even did pretty well at 6mbps.

I am streaming 1080p (vs 1080i) and it gets choppy at times. I end up downloading and watching it at another time.

 

[Lsbcal]

Haven't figured out how to get these *easily* so still have cable and HD package:
1) PBS and BBC news
2) PBS series (Masterpiece Theater, Nova, occasional Frontline) on an HD TV screen
3) Baseball playoff series
4) 49ers games
5) DVR to time shift items 1 & 2
6) A few series like "The Profit"

The above plus all the other junk stuff we get now for about $50 above the internet connection which is at 50 Mbps.

We read a lot and watch Netflix DVD's and occasionally some streamed stuff too.

 

[ziggy29]

HBO just handed me the scissors indeed! I have been pushing to get rid of cable TV for a while but DW could not live without HBO. Snip snip!

My understanding is that at least at first, HBO's online streaming content wouldn't be the same as what they offer on cable and satellite. That could (and probably will) change over time, though. Right now the content creators are a little gun-shy about pissing off the cable and satellite companies, but if this idea gains more traction and more people cut the cable and ditch the dish, I'd expect them to go more "all in" with this content delivery approach.

 

[FIREd]

My understanding is that at least at first, HBO's online streaming content wouldn't be the same as what they offer on cable and satellite. That could (and probably will) change over time, though. Right now the content creators are a little gun-shy about pissing off the cable and satellite companies, but if this idea gains more traction and more people cut the cable and ditch the dish, I'd expect them to go more "all in" with this content delivery approach.

We'll have to see the actual offering and price point.

The only way I would want to keep cable TV is if they moved to an "a la carte" model. No more subsidizing 400 stupid channels just to get HBO or other channels of interest.