Cord-cutting is accelerating faster than expected

[Shawn Knight]

The big picture: Traditional television powerhouses are struggling to retain subscribers. As mobile device usage climbs and 5G hits the scene, the bleeding will only continue. Something has to give which is why we're suddenly seeing a lot of realignment and mergers take place in space.

The cord-cutting movement is picking up serious steam. According to a recent report from eMarketer, the number of traditional pay TV subscribers in the US is projected to fall to just 169.7 million by 2022. In 2015, the figure sat at 205.4 million.

eMarketer says the number of cord-cutters, defined as adults who have ever cancelled pay TV service and continue without it, will climb 32.8 percent this year to 33.0 million. That’s up from the 22 percent growth rate and 27.1 million projected in July 2017.

eMarketer principal analyst Paul Verna said compelling original programming from companies like Netflix, Amazon and YouTube is the main factor fueling the growth of on-demand streaming platforms. The availability of affordable live TV packages that are delivered via the Internet without the need for installation fees or hardware (satellites, cable boxes, etc.) are helping driving the acceleration of cord-cutting.

The findings echo similar sentiments shared by Magid Media Futures last month. In a survey of 2,400 online users, about eight percent of respondents said they were extremely likely to cancel their pay TV service and not get another one within the next 12 months. That’s up from the six percent who said they planned on cancelling a year earlier and the 5.7 percent who said the same in 2016.

Lead illustration courtesy Paweł Jońca

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/75652-cord-cutting-accelerating-faster-than-expected.html

 

[Cycloid Torus]

Why watch? Except for PBS and occasional look/see at Fox & ABC, there really isn't anything compelling.
"I'd Rather Be Gaming"

 

[cliffordcooley]

I wonder what the numbers are for those who have simply passed away?

 

[Evernessince]

I wonder what the numbers are for those who have simply passed away?

I've seen cases where comcast will keep billing people long after they died and try to heckle the family for the money.

 

[yRaz]

Well people literally cannot afford the peice.of cable they won't pay for it. $180/m for internet and anything but basic cable? Go pound salt. I have a high quality digital antenna and that does a great job at picking up local news. Aside from that I listen to NPR and watch Netflix/Hulu. I can watch football with my digital antenna on the local channels and I pay $130 a season to stream hockey

 

[cliffordcooley]

@Evernessince, that is despicable. And I wish it was hard for me to believe.

 

[Evernessince]

Well people literally cannot afford the peice.of cable they won't pay for it. $180/m for internet and anything but basic cable? Go pound salt. I have a high quality digital antenna and that does a great job at picking up local news. Aside from that I listen to NPR and watch Netflix/Hulu. I can watch football with my digital antenna on the local channels and I pay $130 a season to stream hockey

Cable really gets you with the cost of their sports programming. Typically it's an extra $30 on top of their advertised price in "fees" alone. That's not including installation fees, local news broadcast fees, and much much more. Your first month you are looking at $60+ over the advertised price and $40 each much for as long as they are your cable company.

I was going to switch to Verizon but after fees I'd rather just stick with Charter Internet. It's not worth it for TV anymore. Not going to pay a ton of cash just to watch a sports game or two every week.

 

[GregonMaui]

Is it any wonder? Spectrum just converted our complex to their "all-digital" format. What a joke:

1) 1990s technology set top boxes (yes its 2018 and STBs, I know, right?), are always hot, so waste energy. do absolutely nothing. No streaming, no Bluetooth sound, no - well basically your 1990s technology
2) "1080" is crappy, the bit rate is so low, clarity and digital artifacts abound.
3) most of the stations are duplicates
4) syfy channel is not HD
5) all channels are inferior to DirectTv

I use my smart tv to watch Netflix, at 3.5-6 mbps, the picture is significantly better than every channel on Spectrum.

If they wanted me to pay for Spectrum, snip-snip.

And a big thank-you to the administration ending net neutrality, that sounds like a win for Spectrum's crap, but a loss for all of their customers.

And just as a technology critique. Think of all that bandwidth coming into your home. I read somewhere that the cable can pump 1-6 gbps, that is at least equal to fiber, isn't it. wouldn't that bandwidth be better spent delivering internet like Chanels into the home, ergo the cable companies cut their own cord and deliver what we actually want?

 

[cliffordcooley]

I read somewhere that the cable can pump 1-6 gbps, that is at least equal to fiber, isn't it. wouldn't that bandwidth be better spent delivering internet like Channels into the home, ergo the cable companies cut their own cord and deliver what we actually want?

*the drum rolls and then the microphone drops*

There is a problem with that thought though. That would be bandwidth streamed into all homes at the same time. For Internet each home would require its own bandwidth for independent data.

 

[GregonMaui]

Not at all. You are assuming that they cable system stays cable stuck in the 80s and 90s. why not change the technology similar to what the internet is today? Send a request to a server, have a custom download to your home. with 6gbps into your home there is a lot of extra bandwidth to have snippets playing on your box, or whatever.

 

[ShObiT]

I read somewhere that the cable can pump 1-6 gbps, that is at least equal to fiber, isn't it. wouldn't that bandwidth be better spent delivering internet like Channels into the home, ergo the cable companies cut their own cord and deliver what we actually want?

*the drum rolls and then the microphone drops*

There is a problem with that thought though. That would be bandwidth streamed into all homes at the same time. For Internet each home would require its own bandwidth for independent data.

I use to get internet from Cable 3 years ago I think, convenient but too unstable and unreliable, I dropped the service, later the company did too, but they did try... PS: I live in Dominican Republic.

 

[Jeff Re]

How many of these are actually cutting the cord and how many are just switching to something like Sling? Heck in most cases the data still comes through the same cable that the TV was coming through. That's not cutting anything except maybe a few useless channels.

 

[wiyosaya]

Well people literally cannot afford the peice.of cable they won't pay for it. $180/m for internet and anything but basic cable? Go pound salt. I have a high quality digital antenna and that does a great job at picking up local news. Aside from that I listen to NPR and watch Netflix/Hulu. I can watch football with my digital antenna on the local channels and I pay $130 a season to stream hockey

According to Consumer Reports, something like 40-percent of the younger generations are completely unaware that TV can be received for free over-the-air. In areas where there is decent reception, I bet the quality is better than the live local offerings from any of the services.

Is the Hockey through the NHL site? It was a while ago, but the last time I checked, NHL Center Ice from the NHL site was $99 for the season. Unfortunately, the only thing the NHL site has online right now is a $10/mo offer for all of last season's games, so I cannot verify that they still have that $99/season offer right now.

I do pretty much the same as you, and I don't and won't subscribe to anything like Sling or Hulu live. I can wait until the shows I want to watch play on the lower tiers on Hulu or come to Netflix. All these live services offer less channels, not that that really matters, for what is essentially a higher per-channel cost. As I see it, they are attempts to maintain their status quo and someone out there has likely seen this as an opportunity to boost their profits.

I don't see all these services popping up making as much as they think they can because people are moving in the cord-cutting direction to cut costs. To subscribe to all the different services would cost way more than subscription TV in the first place. So people will prioritize, get what they think they need, and ignore the rest. I, for one, do not plan to subscribe to Disney or any other of these new streaming services. I have more excellent, IMO, content than I can possibly watch with OTA, base Netflix, and base Hulu.

 

[yRaz]

According to Consumer Reports, something like 40-percent of the younger generations are completely unaware that TV can be received for free over-the-air. In areas where there is decent reception, I bet the quality is better than the live local offerings from any of the services.

Is the Hockey through the NHL site? It was a while ago, but the last time I checked, NHL Center Ice from the NHL site was $99 for the season. Unfortunately, the only thing the NHL site has online right now is a $10/mo offer for all of last season's games, so I cannot verify that they still have that $99/season offer right now.

I do pretty much the same as you, and I don't and won't subscribe to anything like Sling or Hulu live. I can wait until the shows I want to watch play on the lower tiers on Hulu or come to Netflix. All these live services offer less channels, not that that really matters, for what is essentially a higher per-channel cost. As I see it, they are attempts to maintain their status quo and someone out there has likely seen this as an opportunity to boost their profits.

I don't see all these services popping up making as much as they think they can because people are moving in the cord-cutting direction to cut costs. To subscribe to all the different services would cost way more than subscription TV in the first place. So people will prioritize, get what they think they need, and ignore the rest. I, for one, do not plan to subscribe to Disney or any other of these new streaming services. I have more excellent, IMO, content than I can possibly watch with OTA, base Netflix, and base Hulu.

No, center ice is not what I purchased, it was access to the game as broadcasted by whatever station was playing it but it blacked out during commercials which was really annoying. They also didn't have the between period highlights. It was either 130 or 139 last season, I don't remember. I just remember thinking it was a good deal around that price considering I watch hockey everyday when it's on.

Let's Go Pens!

 

[Uncle Al]

Well, I think the most telling tale of this bit of information is how it explains why the FCC killed net neutrality, otherwise the big boys would have to compete on an equal playing field with the up and comers ......

 

[wiyosaya]

No, center ice is not what I purchased, it was access to the game as broadcasted by whatever station was playing it but it blacked out during commercials which was really annoying. They also didn't have the between period highlights. It was either 130 or 139 last season, I don't remember. I just remember thinking it was a good deal around that price considering I watch hockey everyday when it's on.

Let's Go Pens!

Were you able to watch Pens' home games, or were they blacked out? Center Ice, from the NHL site, blacks out in market home games, I think.

 

[yRaz]

Were you able to watch Pens' home games, or were they blacked out? Center Ice, from the NHL site, blacks out in market home games, I think.

VPN is an easy work around. As I pay for one anyway I don't consider that an added expense

 

[Raytrace3D]

Lets see, pay 150+ a month for less than a 5-10 stations worth watching (not at any given time), and most with no original content during the day OR pay nothing and get 100% original content 24-7 when you want it.... hmmm.. no brainer. I hope Comcast dies... lol

 

[Greg Powell]

Yes, we hated cable but it was because of the "fee" for being a loyal customer. Went to ATT's dish combo and every time it rains we loose tv signal. We may be a bit old school to the young crowd but TV shouldn't be dependent on the internet or cloud cover.
We want the regular guide and DVR that we are used to. Yes, I can watch a lot of tv online but not going to do it that way.