While More People Switch To Streaming TV, Cable Stocks are Plummetting (investors.com) 120
An anonymous reader quotes Investor's Business Daily:
Shares in Charter Communications plunged after the cable TV firm reported first quarter earnings and lost more video subscribers than expected, also sparking a sell-off in Comcast and Altice USA... Charter said it lost 122,000 video subscribers, nearly triple analyst predictions for a fall of 43,000. Comcast on Wednesday said it lost 96,000 video subscribers, exceeding estimates for a drop of 75,000.... With Friday's sell-off, Comcast stock is down 20% in 2018, with Charter falling more than 24%...
Cable TV firms aren't the only losers. AT&T this week said it lost 187,000 pay-TV customers, including satellite TV subscribers and its U-verse landline business. AT&T's DirecTV Now internet streaming service added 312,000 customers. But AT&T garners much lower profit margins from video streaming.
Cable companies are now raising prices on broadband services to compensate, according to the article.
MarketWatch notes that Charter also lost 100,000 customers in the same three-month period in 2017, calling the ongoing trend "a fundamental shift in consumer behavior."
Cable TV firms aren't the only losers. AT&T this week said it lost 187,000 pay-TV customers, including satellite TV subscribers and its U-verse landline business. AT&T's DirecTV Now internet streaming service added 312,000 customers. But AT&T garners much lower profit margins from video streaming.
Cable companies are now raising prices on broadband services to compensate, according to the article.
MarketWatch notes that Charter also lost 100,000 customers in the same three-month period in 2017, calling the ongoing trend "a fundamental shift in consumer behavior."
Not fast enough. (Score:1)
Re: Not fast enough. (Score:1)
Your internet prices seemed to be subsidized by your TV pricing. If you no longer pay for TV pricing then your internet pricing will rise to compensate. After all, someone has to pay for the cable to get to your house, and that was likely massively financed, so there are continued payments due on the loans. You might have to learn to accept it.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you referring to the cables which were in many cases were installed 30 or more years ago?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Not fast enough. (Score:5, Insightful)
Bullshit, if in a 3rd world country I can get Gigabit fiber + TV + unlimited data 3G stick + mobile subscription with unlimited data plan, all for 25 bucks a month, then clearly something's very fishy in the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not French.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Not fast enough. (Score:5, Interesting)
It's the other way around, actually.
Now that no one wants cableTV any more, cable companies are left with massive infrastructure for a smaller customer base. For example, equipment to distribute TV signals over the wire, to replace TV commercials (cable companies do that in Canada, at least), and to pay for the product itself.
Compliance with FCC regs for TV rebroadcasting, blackouts for specific areas, endless TV-only 'things to manage, support, and do'. Heck, even 'public access channels'.
With a constant reduction in sales on that side, there's going to be overcapacity in manpower and tech/infrastructure for quite some time.
Thing is, bandwidth is cheap, cheap, CHEAP! So is providing it. Just acting as a pipe though, doesn't allow for them to gouge you on 100 other things. It doesn't provide the same profit. Realistically, they could provide gigabit speeds for $20 per month, and STILL make a profit -- but, that profit would be very slim compared to all those packages and the rape that comes with them.
In a competitive world, you'd (supposedly) have companies competing... but that doesn't happen most of the time with TV or Internet in most markets.
So, I suspect internet is now subsudizing TV. And these complaints are just more blather and bullshit. They've probably also signed poorly crafted deals, where they perhaps pay $x per month for each channel, with a minor change per subscriber. A plus in the old days, a minus now.
And of course most of these clowns are ALSO content providers. Which means they have to support all their specialty channels, but now with fewer and fewer people.
Here's the amusing thing though.
They think "HEEEY, they don't buy what we're selling.. well, we'll MAKE them buy it, but charging them more for something COMPLETELY UNRELATED!"
Internet != TV. Yet they think raising the price on Internet is the way to go.
No!
Raise the price on TV/CABLE if it is more expensive. Then people paying for a failing service, will leave.. oh wait.
So I guess they decided to tax others to support their failing TV business.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Not fast enough. (Score:4, Insightful)
The main companies are still seeing high profits. Their CEOs are still making 10's of millions of dollars per year.
When the going gets tough, they just charge customers more to protect their profits knowing the customer is screwed since the market lacks true competition.
I cut the cord in April, 2009. I paid $46.95/month for internet. Now I pay $80.70/month. Service hasn't gotten any better during that time.
Re: (Score:2)
Just to be clear - your internet speed is the same today in 2018 as it was 9 years ago? I find that unlikely.
Mind you, I do agree that providing 100mbps today is technologically as costly as 10mbps a decade ago (give or take but it makes the point).
Yes, the cable companies have long feared what the internet and streaming would do to their revenue and, instead of taking a useful outlook, they hid their heads in the sand like the RIAA and tried to force everyone to perpetuate their doomed business model. No
Re: (Score:1)
Cable TV prices skyrocketed long before cord cutting started hurting their bottom line. Netflix et al are not viable replacements for TV, people are simply making do
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not fast enough. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that's what you get for denying them additional revenue! What, you think you have the right to just pay for what you use? Silly peasant.
Re: (Score:1)
Sounds like (Score:3, Insightful)
A good time to buy in. There's too much money at play for these companies to simply fold up.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
No, but they will definitely shrink.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's too much money at play for these companies to simply fold up.
This is a really bad heuristic. P/E ratio is a better way to figure out whether it's a good time to buy or not.
Re: (Score:2)
BullSh!t Flag waived (Score:4)
Comcast Q1 2018 profit beats expectation:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/2... [cnbc.com]
Verizon : Q1 2018 MASSIVE profit boost of 32%
https://www.highgeekly.com/bus... [highgeekly.com]
These companies are carving up the internet (Comcast is "bundling Netflix", oh, and if you don't pay the higher Comcast rate, your traffic 'flix gets punished aka: deprioritized) and monetizing user data just EXACTLY as the NN supporters claimed would happen. The result is massive profits... which drive stock prices, higher consumer costs, and poorer user experience...
Re: (Score:3)
firstnet is a $40B, 25 year deal that AT$T won the sole provider single contract to provide 1st repsonder communication services. One of the miles stones is that FN was to be operational by 1/1/2018, AT&T claims it is, but it's not. There's no fixed IP's yet *(necessary end point VPNs) and band 14 isn't live - without BOTH of these, FN is functionally useless.
Re: (Score:2)
Due to the Trump tax breaks and repeal of net neutrality, the communications cabal is racking in record profits:
Comcast Q1 2018 profit beats expectation:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/2... [cnbc.com]
Verizon : Q1 2018 MASSIVE profit boost of 32%
https://www.highgeekly.com/bus... [highgeekly.com]
These companies are carving up the internet (Comcast is "bundling Netflix", oh, and if you don't pay the higher Comcast rate, your traffic 'flix gets punished aka: deprioritized) and monetizing user data just EXACTLY as the NN supporters claimed would happen. The result is massive profits... which drive stock prices, higher consumer costs, and poorer user experience...
They got the bump from the tax cut in December when it passed [yahoo.com], any NN stock bump would already be priced in as well.
But now the market is responding to the fact that people are dropping their cable subscriptions faster than expected.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Keep in mind that stock price is based on some weird gut feeling of how a company might perform in future, not on current profitability.
Re: (Score:2)
Problem is, most places (Score:2)
have no choice, cable internet is the only access. Unless you still have a landline and want to suffer with DSL or dial-up, so the cord isn't cut, just the bleeding costs of multiple services from one of the local monopolies.
But a year of (an antenna) netflix, amazon prime, and hulu costs less than a couple months of cable tv.
And for the most part, it's all content. Commercials for the most part don't exist on the streaming solutions...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"my prices are lifetime locked" ... whose lifetime?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
DSL performance tech has improved quite a bit. Last year, they started offering 14 Mbps DSL in my area. I was unable to negotiate with Comcast before then. After they came in Comcast was willing to negotiate. I didn't really want DSL but they made for a valid negotiation option. If I could get DSL at 25 Mbps, then they are more of a viable option. I would only need to use them for three months and could then go back to Comcast with a promotional rate (which I'd try to get for 2 years). Telecomm companies really hate losing customers.
I'm probably at least 3 miles from the closest place I could provision any DSL/ADSL services, the only fiber around here is in the corn fields.
Also the phone company cut the two phone lines on my property after I ditched them 20 years ago.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I don't understand why the stock would drop (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
they're still the Gatekeepers to virtually all content. They can raise the price as high as they want. WallStreet has to know that.
Offering media means you're offering special content no one else can deliver, you can charge a higher premium.
Once you're just a utility all you can sell is bits, consumers find it a lot easier to compare packages so margins are lower.
Re: (Score:2)
With streaming that cost is now much lower for as many hours of new movies and series.
The number of hours people have to watch cant be changed every day.
The costs of cable cant be changed quickly as they have so much to pay for. Movies, series, sport and exclusive content.
Streaming looks like a much better deal to average users who just want a few hours of new TV shows and who want to save on costs.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I, for one, do not welcome our cable overlords.... (Score:5, Interesting)
When I left the US a decade ago, I was paying about $100 a month to Comcast for internet service and basic cable (no premium channels, no HD, not that it mattered since I didn't have an HDTV). Today in France, I pay €39.99 a month for basic cable, internet service, VOIP including free international phone calls, and all the mobile phone calls and text messages I can make (within France, international texts typically run me about €0.20 a month). My parents in the US, for that same bundle of services, are paying more than $200 a month.
I can't really see myself doing anything but streaming TV if I ever move back to the US. I enjoy TV, but I don't need it. Why should I spend a bunch of money supporting a business model that doesn't really serve me?
Re: (Score:1)
You can even pay less. I'm with Bouygues paying 3euros per month for illimited calls/20gb/etc.., and 8euros for the fixed line (same stuff as yours). Or you can find in venteprivee.com offers with free with the fixed line at 2 euros, and the cellphone 1 euro (they have those offers every 3 months)
$100/month (Score:2)
Abusing rule of law (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Att will survive (Score:2)
They make lots on wireless and they own the fiber, they also moved a lot of their uverse customers over to directv which lowers ATT's costs.
ATT's uverse has the advantage of not being the fastest but being cheaper and good enough for most people. ATT also doesnt have the customer hate that comcast does.
Re: (Score:2)
its their fault (Score:2)
they have nobody to blame but themselves. Nickle and dime their customers to bankruptcy with all their different fees, forced packages, and more. they should have seen this coming. They fooled themselves into thinking their customers will put up with price increases every few months. I cut the cord over 10 years ago and never looked back.
They have it covered. (Score:3)
Unless there is a real competitor to the cable broadband pipeline to the homes, the cable companies will settle into a new revenue pattern.
Re: (Score:2)
Down to the payments of an ISP?
Good by at $20 for Comcast (Score:3)
COMCAST is trending back to $20/share where it will be a good buy. With the repeal of Net Neutrality, they will be back with a vengeance. Nothing stopped them before from overcharging and nothing will stop them from making us pay to be in the Internet fast lane, even though we the taxpayers paid to build their networks and rural America is still dark.
So you might as well buy their stock at $20 and make some money on the comeback since that is all you will ever get out of them, other than a high monthly Internet service bill.
Is that even legal? (Score:2)
I know they can sell their services at whatever price they want, but what are they trying to compensate exactly? Less people watching cable means less expenses on the TV side, doesn't it? It only looks like a cash grab to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Want a different ISP with lower costs? Shop around.
Raising prices? (Score:2)
You reap what you sow (Score:3)
If cable companies had ever offered the ability to get extra channels like Discovery, or Lifetime as individual items instead of giant bundles, they could have been the ones transitioning us all into streaming and being the natural gateway for quality streaming delivery.
Instead they created the perfect conditions for streaming providers to experiment with how to deliver good quality video over the internet and totally bypass the ISP as an issue, or like Netflix work out how to get hosted elements inside a provider...
As cable companies become nothing more than very bad ISP's, I will just pity them for what could have been.
It's the content-providers' fault (Score:3)
> If cable companies had ever offered the ability to get extra channels like Discovery, or
> Lifetime as individual items instead of giant bundles, they could have been the ones transitioning
> us all into streaming and being the natural gateway for quality streaming delivery.
It's the content-owners' fault. E.g. Disney owns ABC, multiple ESPN channels, and multiple Disney channels. They offer *ALL-OR-NOTHING*. I.e. if a cableco wants ABC and Disney channels, they *MUST* put ESPN on basic on 80% of th
Change! (Score:2)
Companies need to change and be cheaper.
Noooo! Must have TV! (Score:1)
DirectTV, your time is coming... (Score:1)
Really very annoying. JUST LET ME PICK MY OWN CHANNELS and we can go from there.
Ferret
Re: (Score:2)
As you switch your multichannel pay TV from cable to satellite, are you also planning to switch your Internet from cable to satellite? Enjoy paying overage penalties to your satellite ISP when your desktop or laptop computer running the most popular PC operating system decides to download gigabytes of feature updates because its publisher neglected to provide a GUI to change the media cost setting for Ethernet.
They could allow a la carte tomorrow (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It seems the streaming services that are eating cable's lunch managed to give the Mouse the finger just fine.
What's a TV? (Score:2)
We haven't owned a TV nor "watched TV" in a decade (was a 15" blue night special, at that). Same with streaming.
We simply fail to see what is good, interesting, necessary or attractive about TV (or cable, or most other online shows and things you can watch).
All of us read, think, and talk instead. A bit like Fahrenheit 451 ...
Screw the cable companies! (Score:1)
I get my internet from the local phone company, who has no skin in the content provider arena, and I couldn't be happier. Well.... if their gigabit connection was in my area, I'd probably be a little happier, but I've got a 50/20 connection from them, and a static IP address, for a somewhat reason
Seven step program for large cable providers (Score:2)
1. Raise TV rates to an absurd level
2. Wait for the vacuum to be filled by alternatives
3. Lose your TV customers
4. Raise Internet rates to an absurd level
5. Wait for the vacuum to be filled by alternatives
6. Lose your Internet customers
7. Go bankrupt