Why Would Someone Need Cable TV Service?

[rk911]

we've had cable tv for 40+ years. most recently we have Comcast plus a number of streaming services (Paramount +, Peacock Std, Prime, Netflix, Apple TV+). we dvr most comcast offerings so we can skip the commercials but we also like the variety of programming. we still keep a functional OTA TV antenna on the roof as a Plan B for those very rare occasions when the cable goes out.

 

[ncbill]

WAF is the reason for our $200/month triple-play via the cable company.

Were it just me I'd buy the Televes Diginova, mount it on my outside deck and go OTA.

And switch to T-Mobile Home Internet @ $50/month.

 

[skyking1]

We are subscribed for simplicity's sake for the next year. I thought about doing a bunch of apps and weaning off the streaming TV app that comes with our small Internet Service Provider.
It's buggy at times and not all that great, but it gets DW her local news fix.
When we get the new house done we get to do it all over again in a small market with little in the way of choices.
In both locations we are hopelessly blocked by terrain for OTA, which is a bummer. The area generally has good OTA options.

 

[rk911]

WAF is the reason for our $200/month triple-play via the cable company.

Were it just me I'd buy the Televes Diginova, mount it on my outside deck and go OTA.

And switch to T-Mobile Home Internet @ $50/month.

WAF?

 

[GenXguy]

WAF?

I think that's wife acceptance factor.

 

[rk911]

I think that's wife acceptance factor.

that's a new one for me. thanks.

 

[Montecfo]

Someone mentioned that prices will continue to go up. Duh. Of course, with skyrocketing inflation, prices have been going up on almost everything at a fast clip.

Perhaps I said that? It is a different point than general price increases.

"Cable" used to be really cheap too. Less than $10 a month. But price increases at a rate 2-3 times inflation got us to where we are now.

Streaming prices have risen faster than cable over the past 10 years or so.

We had unbundling, now we have consolidation and re-bundling. Guess what? All those content providers expect to continue getting paid. As subscribers move to streaming, price increase pressures move with them.

Nothing new under the sun. My point is streaming is just cable packaged differently. It is not a totally different animal.

That packaging works for many folks which is a good thing.

 

[Luvtoride]

“Nothing new under the sun”!? Really?
The content on the streaming services is light years ahead of any traditional OTA channels/ networks.

Between made for streaming movies, TV series, documentaries and live events there is so much more great quality entertainment! Yes, we’re paying for it but we don’t need to sit thru commercials or DVR and skip commercials to enjoy the content.

 

[statsman]

All those content providers expect to continue getting paid.

Yep. Even those streaming services trying to limit channels and keep costs under control are being pinched by the content providers. Sling TV, long known for not carrying local channels, actually has been providing NBC and/or Fox local channels in select markets. Same cost whether you receive those channels or not.

Now comes along ABC (Disney owned), providing local ABC channels to some major markets for Sling (NY, LA, SF, Chicago, Philly, and 1 or 2 others that escape me at the moment). The problem is Disney wants to be get paid, so the Sling TV subscribers in those markets *must* pay $5/mo extra, even if they don't want their local ABC channel through Sling.

I would bet the bank that Disney strong-armed Sling TV into this, otherwise they would pull their other Disney content (Disney Channel, ESPN, etc.) off of Sling's Orange package, effectively killing it. I believe the Sling Blue subscribers, who don't get any of Disney's content, are also paying $5/mo more in those markets with no option to opt out.

Expect more of the same going forward.

 

[MBSC]

I believe the Sling Blue subscribers, who don't get any of Disney's content, are also paying $5/mo more in those markets with no option to opt out.

Also? Sling Orange-only subscribers in those markets do not get ABC and do not pay the $5 local broadcast fee. Sling and Disney had a carriage dispute a few months ago and all Disney channels were pulled for one weekend. Blue lost National Geographic and FX (the movie channel) because they are partially Disney owned.

Sling has added the ABC local channel and increased prices by $5 for Sling TV Blue subscribers in five cities.

While Sling Orange-tier customers are not affected, subscribers who have Sling Blue as part of their package in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York City, Philadelphia and San Francisco will now have to pay extra but will gain access to local ABC, FOX and NBC stations.

Reference: https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/sling-tv-blue-bumps-price-by-5-for-some-adds-abc/

 

[JoeWras]

Just coughed up the $79 for YouTubeTV for a month in order to watch the NHL playoffs.

We were immediately treated to an amazing overtime game (for anyone outside of Boston).

Of course, I have 2 full series to watch starting tomorrow, so we'll make good use of the fee, even though it is shocking how much YTTV has gone up.

Here's the sad fact: live sports are so expensive right now, people are willing to pony up for the TV expenses.

I really don't know what is going on it in sports. Seriously. It is so, so, so expensive to watch major league level games live and in person. This has ripple effects.

"Experiences, not things" is understandable. But $18 beer, $10 hot dog, and $250 seats in the nosebleeds?

Having splinters driven under your fingernails is also an experience.

 

[statsman]

Also? Sling Orange-only subscribers in those markets do not get ABC and do not pay the $5 local broadcast fee. Sling and Disney had a carriage dispute a few months ago and all Disney channels were pulled for one weekend. Blue lost National Geographic and FX (the movie channel) because they are partially Disney owned.

Wow, that's in reverse of what I was told. Strange indeed. So, why would Sling Blue, which lost NatGeo and FX, be forced to carry ABC as an added cost for those markets?

 

[Qs Laptop]

You’re not going to get everything you want without cable, Hulu+Live, YouTube TV or another aggregate streaming app - and you’ve ruled them all out.

You can install all the separate apps to get the channels your wife wants, but you’ll have to pay for each (without a service provider in all cases). It will probably cost more than cable, Hulu+Live or YouTube TV. And if you do that you don’t get a channel guide, or a (cloud) DVR. Finding programs will be (way) more challenging, so would recording. Happy wife?

The providers aren’t stupid…

OP answered OP's own question in the OP.

1) Local sports
2) Local DVR recordings and upgraded user experience, including full screen fast forward, better control of pause, direct channel number entry, etc.

Right, so the answer(s) as to why I would want cable are:

1. Receive local channels without using an over the air antenna.
2. When cable is equipped with a DVR an easy way to record programs.
3. Local sports teams live game coverage.
4. Streaming channels that require a TV service provider sign in credentials to establish a "free" account to use their streaming service. For example, I use my Comcast cable username and password to access things like Fox Sports streaming channels, TBS streaming channels, etc. Without a TV provider account I would have to create an account specific to these channels and pay a small monthly fee to stream these channel's content.

After examining my options I am considering dropping down to the most basic, lowest tier of Comcast channel packages, "Limited/Basic" which gets me the local network channels, TBS, CNN, Fox News, Bloomberg News, the local community channels, all those audio only music channels no one watches, and the shopping channels. I will move the Xfinity X1 cable box up to the wife's TV, and return her auxillery box to Comcast. I will use the Roku Xfinity streaming app on my TV in the rare instance I might want to access Comcast.

This will lower my cable bill from $213 to $140 per month. Of that $140, $90 is for "superfast" 800 mb/sec internet and about $25 is for various access fees, taxes, and surcharges, meaning the lowest tier of cable TV is about $25. This tier comes with 20 hours of DVR recording time.

As Midpack points out, if I dropped cable and wanted to get separate streaming services for ABC, NBC, and Fox, I would be paying a separate monthly fee for each one. Add up all those separate monthly fees and it gets near the $25 a month for the basic-basic cable. At this point, and considering you get the DVR function, might as well pay $25 a month for basic-basic cable.

I will make this move after the Minnesota Twins, Major League Baseball, and Bally Sports North figure out who is going to have the broadcast rights to the Twins' games. Right now the situation is that Bally Sports missed their April payment, MLB has filed a lawsuit, Bally has filed an appeal, and there will be a court hearing sometime before May 21st.

 

[Qs Laptop]

Just coughed up the $79 for YouTubeTV for a month in order to watch the NHL playoffs.

My son was over for dinner last night and he's saying you can "split" the YouTube TV subscription, meaning he could have it at his house and we could have it at our house and we would split the monthly cost.

I'm not sure if he means sharing passwords, or the fact that YouTubeTV allows access via many multiple devices, or what.

Does YouTubeTV allow sharing an account? Or is it accomplished by sharing passwords across multiple devices?

Because $40 a month for everything YouTubeTV provides would be acceptable to me.

I really don't know what is going on it in sports. Seriously. It is so, so, so expensive to watch major league level games live and in person. This has ripple effects.

"Experiences, not things" is understandable. But $18 beer, $10 hot dog, and $250 seats in the nosebleeds?

Having splinters driven under your fingernails is also an experience.

It is getting insane. There is far more money in pro sports than we are told about. How else can players continue to get exorbitant salaries? And we the consumer keep paying more to see these people play. That's why it keeps going up, because we keep shelling out the dough.

Now throw in legalized sports gambling into the mix...

There are workarounds, though. StubHub for tickets purchased the day of the game usually yields significant discounts on tickets. Last year I was attending Twins' games for $8 a seat and sitting in $30 seats (upper deck behind home plate). You can get lower level behind the dugout seats for $50-$60 that are regularly priced at $130.

I got the MLB.TV package last year for 1/2 price. This gets you all the MLB games except the ones in your local market, which are blacked out. There are some really cool features on MLB.TV that really heighten the experience. I loved it so much I re-upped this year at the regular price. There was a small window back in March where T-Mobile customers could have gotten MLB.TV for free.

I find it incredible that Bally Sports North continues to broadcast Cleveland Guardian and Minnesota Twins games even though they have not made legally required monthly payments to carry the games. My wish is that MLB steps in, acquires the contracts and adds local teams to MLB.TV, dropping the blackout rules.

 

[JoeWras]

My son was over for dinner last night and he's saying you can "split" the YouTube TV subscription, meaning he could have it at his house and we could have it at our house and we would split the monthly cost.

I'm not sure if he means sharing passwords, or the fact that YouTubeTV allows access via many multiple devices, or what.

Does YouTubeTV allow sharing an account? Or is it accomplished by sharing passwords across multiple devices?

Because $40 a month for everything YouTubeTV provides would be acceptable to me.

Yes, we don't have kids to do this with, but if you do, this is a great way to bring down the cost and it is within the terms of YTTV. You do it by adding an email to your family group. They get notified, then do something to sign on. Done.

Details here, directly from the alphabet company: https://support.google.com/googleone/answer/7251139?hl=en

 

[target2019]

Performance Internet - $67.00 (up to 100 Mbps)
Limited Basic Service - $18.00

With all the other BS it is $116.30.

I think your "Blast" monthly cost goes up after a certain period.

 

[Dawg52]

Internet & Streaming:
Jan thru Aug I average $100/mo.
Sept - Dec(football season) roughly $150/mo.

Not exact as I rotate services around based on promotions and my interest. But its ballpark.

 

[Luvtoride]

.



It is getting insane. There is far more money in pro sports than we are told about. How else can players continue to get exorbitant salaries? And we the consumer keep paying more to see these people play. That's why it keeps going up, because we keep shelling out the dough.

I got the MLB.TV package last year for 1/2 price. This gets you all the MLB games except the ones in your local market, which are blacked out. There are some really cool features on MLB.TV that really heighten the experience. I loved it so much I re-upped this year at the regular price. There was a small window back in March where T-Mobile customers could have gotten MLB.TV for free.

Yes, that's exactly why the price of pro sports channels on TV are going up. We, who want to watch these "gifted athletes" are paying their salaries via the huge TV contracts every major sport has.

I have T-Mobile for my wireless service and have gotten MLB.TV free for the last two years. A decent perk, other than it doesn't allow watching the local market teams. In addition, I get Netflix (basic) for free as well as Apple TV+ for free. It is actually a very good deal with their 55 and over Magenta plans.

 

[ShokWaveRider]

Mine is being cut off on the 20th of this month. Upgrading to 1gb Internet at the same time.

We have all we need for free right now.

 

[PaunchyPirate]

Yes, that's exactly why the price of pro sports channels on TV are going up. We, who want to watch these "gifted athletes" are paying their salaries via the huge TV contracts every major sport has.

I have T-Mobile for my wireless service and have gotten MLB.TV free for the last two years. A decent perk, other than it doesn't allow watching the local market teams. In addition, I get Netflix (basic) for free as well as Apple TV+ for free. It is actually a very good deal with their 55 and over Magenta plans.

Dang, you must be grandfathered into the MLB.TV for free offer. It looks like it's no longer an offer. I just signed up for the top tier Magenta Max 55+. I get Netflix and AppleTV+, but no hint of MLB.TV. Boo. I would have loved to have had that.

 

[livingalmostlarge]

$80 internet no cable. But I know many with cable. We also don't pay for netflix or any streaming except prime and even then I hate amazon and sometimes I think about going back and forth on cancelling it. Actually we were without amazon prime from 2014-2020 (covid) and my mom is on our account now so I pay for it. She loves it and uses it more than we do.

 

[bobandsherry]

Dang, you must be grandfathered into the MLB.TV for free offer. It looks like it's no longer an offer. I just signed up for the top tier Magenta Max 55+. I get Netflix and AppleTV+, but no hint of MLB.TV. Boo. I would have loved to have had that.

FWIW, it was offered as part of the TMobile Tuesday offerings. So keep an eye on it for next year.

 

[PaunchyPirate]

FWIW, it was offered as part of the TMobile Tuesday offerings. So keep an eye on it for next year.

I see that. I had not stumbled on the Tuesday offers yet. But I'm watching them now. Thanks!

 

[Midpack]

This will lower my cable bill from $213 to $140 per month. Of that $140, $90 is for "superfast" 800 mb/sec internet and about $25 is for various access fees, taxes, and surcharges, meaning the lowest tier of cable TV is about $25. This tier comes with 20 hours of DVR recording time.

You may know already, but chances are you don’t need anything like 800 mbps internet unless you are running a business with lots of people online doing very data intensive tasks at the same time. HD streaming uses way more data than most other home uses, and that’s only about 3-5 mbps per stream. Even if you were streaming exclusively in 4K you’d only need about 15-20 mbps. You might be able to save significantly on your internet package and still have more overhead than you’d ever use. FWIW

 

[jollystomper]

This is a good thread for me now. I am considering just dropping Cable TV (xFinity) "cold turkey" and see how it is going for a few months. My cable TV + Internet bill has crept up to a level that I consider "BTD" but also question if the value is still worth it. Plus I try not to sit in front of the TV for anything (including streaming) for more than 2-3 hours per day.

While the main reason I have it is live sports, those are primarily Football and March Madness. I usually do not focus a lot on watching baseball games until the playoffs, so online highlights are fine with me. My thought is to just drop Cable TV at least until September, then look at my options for getting live sports.

I am also curious if Comcast is will to "cut a deal" for those calling to drop cable. About 5-6 years ago I called and they cut my bill by about $30, but subsequent increases have brought it back to above that reduction.