Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Television Businesses United States

Cord-Cutting Keeps Churning: US Pay-TV Cancelers To Hit 33 Million in 2018 (Study) (variety.com) 200

Posted by msmash from the up-next dept.
Millions of Americans have already scrapped traditional pay-TV service, and the exodus is expected to continue apace in 2018. From a report: This year, the number of cord-cutters in the U.S. -- consumers who have ever cancelled traditional pay-TV service and do not resubscribe -- will climb 32.8%, to 33.0 million adults, according to new estimates from research firm eMarketer. That's compared with a total of 24.9 million cord-cutters as of the end of 2017, which was up 43.6% year over year (and an upward revision from eMarketer's previous 22 million estimate). That said, even as the traditional pay-TV universe shrinks, the number of viewers accessing over-the-top, internet-delivered video services keeps growing. About 147.5 million people in the U.S. watch Netflix at least once per month, according to eMarketer's July 2018 estimates. That's followed by Amazon Prime Video (88.7 million), Hulu (55 million), HBO Now (17.1 million) and Dish's Sling TV (6.8 million).
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cord-Cutting Keeps Churning: US Pay-TV Cancelers To Hit 33 Million in 2018 (Study) More

Cord-Cutting Keeps Churning: US Pay-TV Cancelers To Hit 33 Million in 2018 (Study)

Comments Filter:

  • Still have to pay Comcast... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Kenja ( 541830 ) on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @12:56PM (#57001242)
    Do we really think the cable companies care, so long as we're still paying them for the internet access? They have a monopoly no mater how you look at it.

    • Re:Still have to pay Comcast... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TechyImmigrant ( 175943 ) on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @12:59PM (#57001276) Homepage Journal

      Do we really think the cable companies care, so long as we're still paying them for the internet access? They have a monopoly no mater how you look at it.

      They certainly give the impression they do with their internet+TV+phone bundling.

      • Re:Still have to pay Comcast... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by jwhyche ( 6192 ) on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @01:29PM (#57001506) Homepage

        They certainly give the impression they do with their internet+TV+phone bundling

        That is the impression that I got when I cancelled my digital TV service to go only internet. That lady was tripping all over herself to make sure I had at least basic cable. She even took $25 off the internet only option I was looking at to give me basic cable. So I basically got free basic cable and a $25 discount.

        Suddenly, I'm not so sure I got a great deal. What did Aahz say? "Count your fingers and your toes, then your nearest relatives?"

    • This is why net neutrality isn't the solution. Even if the net neutrality legislation we dream of became the law of the land, most ISPs would still have a monopoly, and you'll still be paying monopoly pricing for Internet access.

      The real solution is to introduce competition into the ISP marketplace. Prohibit local governments from awarding monopoly service contracts to cable and telephone companies. Set it up like gas and electricity, where a single company is awarded the monopoly of building and main

      • Even if the net neutrality legislation we dream of became the law of the land, most ISPs would still have a monopoly,

        Most ISPs cannot have a monopoly. A monopoly means "one". "Most" means more than one.

        People keep confusing "the wireline telephone company" which has a true monopoly, the "cable company" which may have a de-facto monopoly but has no government-granted monopoly, and "ISP" which has NEVER had monopoly status ever. There are simply too many ISPs for anyone to claim that any ISP is a monopoly.

        The real solution is to introduce competition into the ISP marketplace. Prohibit local governments from awarding monopoly service contracts to cable and telephone companies.

        FEDERAL LAW has prohibited cable television exclusive franchises (the term for a government-granted monopoly) FOR MORE

        • The fact that there is only one CABLE system in a town due to an economic monopoly does not prevent someone from switching to any of the other, non-cable TV, ISPs. It's only misinformation that keeps them from doing it -- the misinformation that somehow there is just one ISP they can use. Why bother looking if everyone says you won't find one, even if when you look you actually will?

          Of course it does. Where I'm at I can get any ISP I want, as long as I don't care that it's not broadband and comes over DSL. So effectively no, I can't get any broadband ISP I want. There is no competition.

          Its even worse other places. At least in some areas of my town there is Verizon FIOS, not where I live, but where my daughter lives. She has a choice of 2 broadband providers, and any number of ISPs as long as she doesn't want broadband. My friend who lives outside town has no broadband providers availab

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by d0rp ( 888607 )
      After moving into my house and only subscribing to internet service from Comcast, they have called me on the phone and pushed HARD to try and get me to add cable. I eventually hung up. So, apparently they do care.

  • "Cord-cutting" is a presumptive term (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Pfhorrest ( 545131 ) on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @12:59PM (#57001286) Homepage Journal

    I've always disliked the term "cord-cutting", because it presumes that having a cable TV subscription is the normal default state of affairs, and that it's some weird deviance from that norm to not buy a service that you would normally not have if you didn't go out of your way to buy it.

    When I first moved out on my own, and had to start paying my own utilities and such, I was really tight for cash and so decided that I didn't need to spend my very limited money just to watch TV. Fast forward a decade or two and I still don't have TV. I never have had TV, at least not since it could rightly be said that *I* did or didn't have it, rather than my parents.

    I'm not a cord-cutter, because I never had a cord to cut.

    How many of the tallied "cord-cutters" in these figures are like me? Especially younger people, who increasingly see TV as unnecessary, and who are increasingly strapped for cash they are unlikely to waste even starting up service for an unnecessary entertainment package when they could just as well do without.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by lgw ( 121541 )

      You really seem intent to make sure everyone knows you don't have a TV.

      I've never had cable - wasn't worth the money when I was younger, no interest now. I stopped watching broadcast TV when it went digital. But I still have a TV in my living room, and have never really had a lack of things to watch on it. Between NetFlix DVDs, various streaming services, and the occasional torrent there has been plenty.

      I'm finding these days that very little interests me in new movies and TV shows, but there's plenty of

      • You seem really intend on harming on that meme about people seeming intent on people knowing they don't have TV, in a thread explicitly about how many people these days don't have TV.

        I'm not calling attention to the fact that I, like the rest of those 33 million people under discussion, don't have TV. I'm calling attention to the fact that I, and maybe many of those others, didn't "get rid of" TV, but just never bothered to get it in the first place.

        This "cord cutting" idea reminds me of the RIAA counting d

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by jwhyche ( 6192 )

        I find interesting on YouTube to make up the gap

        My son and son in law almost exclusively like to watch youtube. There is some pretty good content on there and with some high production values.

      • My brother went quite a few years using only Netflix DVDs, with no cable, satellite, or broadcast. It really was a good and cost effective service.

    • Re:"Cord-cutting" is a presumptive term (Score:4, Informative)

      by CrimsonAvenger ( 580665 ) on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @01:15PM (#57001394)

      How many of the tallied "cord-cutters" in these figures are like me?

      None of them?

      From TFS: "cord-cutters in the U.S. -- consumers who have ever cancelled traditional pay-TV service and do not resubscribe".

      Which doesn't seem to include people like you, who have never had "traditional pay-TV service".

      Note that I DO fit the definition from TFS. But I'm not a NEW cord-cutter, since I did my cord cutting a couple-three decades back....

    • I've always disliked the term "cord-cutting", because it presumes that having a cable TV subscription is the normal default state of affairs, and that it's some weird deviance from that norm to not buy a service that you would normally not have if you didn't go out of your way to buy it.

      Well, yes..it IS the norm. It has been for a long time, but I would concede that things are changing.

      I'm a bit older, but I've never known a single person in my life, that did not have TV and was not connected to cable. I

      • I think it is a generational thing. As my kids moved out to their own places, they never got cable TV. Only cable Internet.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by nnet ( 20306 )
      To put a fine point on it, a cord-cutter is someone who has previously paid for the service and now doesn't. How does your situation meet that criteria? What said the tally of cord-cutters includes never-before-serviced people?

    • Relevant Onion: https://www.theonion.com/area-man-constantly-mentioning-he-doesnt-own-a-televisi-1819565469

    • Aren't you the guy that can't use metal utensils?

    • I'm not a cord-cutter, because I never had a cord to cut.

      Indeed. You are a "cord-never". I suspect that most Millennials are "cord-never".

    • "Cord cutting" to me alway sort of implied cutting the umbilical cord and becoming an independent adult.
      On the other hand, I wouldn't mind if the phrase changed to become "unshackling the chain".

    • "How many of the tallied "cord-cutters" in these figures are like me? Especially younger people, who increasingly see TV as unnecessary, and who are increasingly strapped for cash they are unlikely to waste even starting up service for an unnecessary entertainment package when they could just as well do without."

      What other reason for cord cutting is there?

    • I've always disliked the term "cord-cutting", because it presumes that having a cable TV subscription is the normal default state of affairs,

      If you have cable TV, then yes, the normal state of affairs is that you have a "cord" that can be cut. Nothing about that term deals with anyone who has no cord to begin with.

      I'm not a cord-cutter, because I never had a cord to cut.

      So you're not part of the group being referred to by that term. What's your problem?

      How many of the tallied "cord-cutters" in these figures are like me?

      None. Statistics about how many people drop cable service ('cord-cutters') come from how many people drop cable service.

      they are unlikely to waste even starting up service for an unnecessary entertainment package

      How do you cut a cord that never existed? Do you spend much of your life thinking about such things? How sad. Maybe you need a hobby,

    • Also, miscounted in such tails are many people like me, who actually have a cable subscription , but only because it is the cheaper way to get a fast internet service. If I could get internet .50 cheaper by dumping cable it would be gone in a heart beat, because I neither use it or have any interest in it.

  • Sports (Score:5, Insightful)

    by lazarus ( 2879 ) on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @01:02PM (#57001304) Journal

    The end of "cable TV" will be when the sports broadcasters start making deals with the over-the-top suppliers. Until that happens people will continue to pay telcos and telcos will continue to find creative bundling ways to take as much of our money as they can.

    That whole industry is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

    • Just watch the Spanish language versions that your HDTV picks up free.

      Almost everything is there. Then just turn on SAP (secondary audio program) on that channel, and, mes amigos, it gives you English on the Spanish broadcast.

    • I don't mind all the sports viewers sticking to cable. If everybody switch to streaming at the same time it would be highly disruptive; even more so than now the programs would be dividied up between major players, you'd get the bit content producers all making their own exclusive streaming channels. Right now the streaming services can't fly under the radar anymore but they're still not so common that that traditional cable and content owners are in a full blown panic. I'd like them to get more time to g

  • ... fails when there's weather South of me.

    The Hopper3 box has an RJ-45 network wire connected to my backbone.

    When I get the alert that satellite is down, Dish should switch to stream.

    --

    I can stream Dish on a smart device from anywhere, assuming my box at home works.

    No good if there's a weather outage or if my home loses power.

    --

    If I subscribe to this or that online stream at $8 - $15/mo., pretty soon I'll be paying more than I am now.

  • I cut the cord earlier this year after Charter decided to raise the price on my extremely basic cable package (the standard channels plus 10 of my choice) and went with Playstation Vue. Vue is nice, I like the free DVR feature and the basic package has all the channels I wanted and more (more than what Charter gave me with that 10 channel thing), but now that I'm not subsidizing my internet connection with the cable bundle it ends up being about the same price that I was paying. I still think it's worth i
    • I have PS Vue as well. I like it for the most part, but really wish they had an a la carte option. I could do without the majority of channels--Hallmark, Lifetime, Oxygen, OWN, etc. It's also a little wonky in that it works differently on my PS3 vs. the PS4. On the PS3, I seem to get every single local channel that is available across the country. I have hundreds of different ABC/CBS/NBC affiliates listed, which is a pain. The other mind-numbing thing about it is how feature poor the PS4 remote control [amazon.com] is.

    • There are indeed people who have internet but who do not watch television at all. It's a bit unfair to them that "media" companies are the ones in charge of internet in most places of the US. The only reason cable companies have internet is because they're the ones who paid for the cables that later became important to getting internet to the home. I'd prefer if the cable companies were split into two, the media part and the cable part.

  • I've looked at the cord-cutting possibilities in the past, but what it really came down to was that for the same set of things that my wife watches now (including a lot of sports), I'd be paying close to the same amount (or more) for various subscriptions plus wasting time tracking down dodgy and unreliable live sports streams, all in the interest of saving what, $10-15 a month at most? Maybe? In a good month....
    • I don't watch sports, so I have no idea how sports streams look like - but do they have the same amount of advertising as cable tv? I find it hard to watch anything with too many ads - streaming gets rid of ads.

  • That said, I probably watch way more Crunchyroll when it's not soccer season (the only reason I do cable)

    I think I paid like $30 for the HDTV antenna, and it lets me get a lot of other services as well, which if you can speak multiple languages, is super sweet.

    Cable did this to themselves.

  • Survey Says... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Strider- ( 39683 ) on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @01:30PM (#57001516)

    I actually responded to a telephone survey on this topic a few days ago (here in Canada). At the end, my basic point to the person taking the survey was "Why in God's name would I pay someone to show me advertising? Get the advertising down to 2 to 3 minutes an hour, and we'll talk." Instead, I have Netflix and Prime for watching what I can, and Usenet to grab everything else that isn't on Prime or Netflix.

    Every time I travel and wind up watching the TV in Hotel rooms, it just boggles my mind at how people can put up with so much advertising.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jezwel ( 2451108 )
      I'm the same. Even the radio in the car is tuned to the Classical FM as it has no ads and the least amount of talking. I'll stream over BT but sometimes couldn't be bothered even with that.
    • I've personally got much the same experience when I visit older family members and when I'm house sitting at my parents' and need to pass the time. Thankfully there's at least the local BBC equivalent where the only ads they have are for upcoming programs and they're between programs. It's always kind of funny to look at shows that are supposed to have ad breaks not actually have them, which I guess is part of the reason why they buy in so many shows from the BBC and HBO in particular.

      However even stream

  • Of course our internet service is picking up more. A small cable company will provide you with fast and reliable support.

    • small cable company? where? every place I have lived in the last 15 years you had a single choice for high speed internet. A large national cable provider. Either comcast or cox.

  • What does that even mean? I googled it, read the wiki, but still that makes no sense as a name. Over-the-top of what?

    • Over the top services are a description given to services like Netflix etc. which you are paying to give you "services" over the "top" of your current internet connection. They did not have to put a satellite into orbit, or worry about cables and dishes etc. They are able to supply "cable" type services without have to lay the cable. So they are inherently cheaper, which is what the old school cable and satellite companies are whining about. Because they laid the cable for your internet (and cable TV) bu
  • Then you are not some loser sitting at home by yourself watching sports. Sit at the pub, slam some shots and beers, B.S. with your friends, and watch the games. Just saying for those that say you can't see away games. Uh, yea you can if you go out to watch the games and INTERACT with PEOPLE.
  • First they scrambled a signal I paid for, and forced me to rent descramblers for each set for $8 per month. Then, they decided that I'd pay $6 per month for Disney-Espn, even though I watch no sports. ESPN was that straw breaking the camel's back. A repurposed Mac Mini, an antenna, and a lifetime TiVo cover pretty much all bases. I don't miss cable at all. Sometimes, in a hotel, I'll see it, watch for ten minutes, notice I can't FF the commercials, and shut it off... My kids don't even know WHY you'd s

  • I ditched cable tv years ago (Score:3)

    by kilodelta ( 843627 ) on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @10:33PM (#57004416) Homepage
    Why - because they kept hiking the rates for it. When I called to see if we could lower the bill they said they could add phone service for $29.99 a month. I told them "What are you trying to get me to cut the cord completely?"

    And fyi it's Cox Communications. Now I read Susan Crawford's "Captive Audience" and in it she says the cable providers overcharge like mad for net service. For example she said the actual cost to provide data on Comcast network was $2 per month so why are they charging closet to $100 a month. Same is true for Cox too.

Slashdot Top Deals

What is research but a blind date with knowledge? -- Will Harvey

Close