Slashdot Mirror


One In Eight To Cut Cable and Satellite TV In 2010

r0k3t writes "It looks like people are finally getting sick of overpriced, ad-infested cable and satellite TV. I had predicted that by 2005 we would mostly be using the net for video — seems like I was a few years off. From the article: 'A cutting-the-cord trend has been the subject of speculation for some time, as networks have increasingly made television programming available for free on the Internet. But a combination of other factors, including a growing number of battles between cable companies and networks, soaring Internet video viewings, and an increase in connected TVs and devices, suggest the trend is finally upon us. ... The biggest reason why customers will cut the cord, according to the study, is the growing cost of pay-TV service. Cable and satellite viewers pay an average of $71 per month, and they receive an average annual price hike of 5%, according to research firm Centris.'" How many of you have made the switch to Internet-only TV, or are considering it? Any regrets?

8 of 502 comments (clear)

  1. Some of us were waaaaay ahead it seems. by CrackedButter · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I gave up TV in 2003. Just use BBC iPlayer for the Doctor Who episodes now. Everything else is a combination of iTunes rentals, torrents and podcasts.

    1. Re:Some of us were waaaaay ahead it seems. by AlamedaStone · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think the only regret I've had since I quit watching TV is that I have no idea what's going on in Lost anymore.

      I still watch Lost, but I have to admit I have the same regret.

      --
      "All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
  2. I have been disconnected for about 4 1/2 years. by Aldenissin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sure, I miss not getting shows that friends talk about at work, but I have other ways. And with Hulu and Netflix, I rely on those other ways less and less, if at all. I want to pay for my content, but not everyone else's. Watching the fiasco's with Disney and ESPN (among others over the years), I was glad that I wasn't involved and getting suckered.

      For me, it began over watching the Discovery Science channel. It was channel 101 and suddenly just out of my lineup range. I had been trying to explain to my father (who lived with me) science concepts, as he was opening up more and showing interest. The TV shows's imagery and hosts could often explain things better than I could, and I might learn something new as well. My free trial was over, and so I called Adelphia (now Comcast) up. They said that not only would I have to forsake my special rate of something like $35 for the next 6 months (I think I had it for a year total) I would have to pay for digital cable and also the first additional digital package. So, for 1 channel they wanted me to almost triple my bill to $95. My next words were, "Cut it off."

      Unfortunately I still am dealing with them over Internet service, but maybe in time things will get better.

    --
    Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control.
  3. Re:2007 by anss123 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    EyeTV TV tuner

    Isn't that just a round about way to say you have a TV, it's just in your computer?

  4. Re:47" HDTV, no cable, no blue ray discs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A story from someone who used to watch TV like *ALL* the time. It simply costs too much for what is there. They cater to a small segment of watchers the 'sports guy'. The rest of us just suck it up. The 'sports guy' will buy the 200 dollar package. The rest of us are left with the 'low' priced 60-80 dollar packages.

    10 years ago it was 25-30 for a decent package. Now it is nearly double on its way to triple. Yeah not a good deal. Then they made using DVRs a pain in the ass. But turn around and rent you a crap one. Then want to rent you a 'digital' box which they overcompress the feed anyway and you end up with the same res as you had before just more boring stations.

    Yeah I cut the cord. It was overpriced and my tastes had changed. So I was not watching much anymore. I now buy DVD's and games with that money. I can buy a whole season for 15-60 bucks. Sure I am a bit out of sync with everyone but who cares! I even 'know' that there is a serious amount of stuff on the net. I do not even bother with it. I dont have time for that. I just buy whatever season I am interested in.

    I remember as a kid there where few commercials on cable TV. It was one of their main selling points. Your paying for it... I then remember them butchering the shows that were on so they could get their 5 mins of commercials in.

    Once you 'cut the cord' you crave it for a couple of months (yes I was 'addicted to it'). But after that you dont even look back. Cable 'missed' the PVR revolution then tried to co-op it. Too late. They should have been ALL over making Tivo and others like it almost stupid easy to do. Instead they were trying to figure out how to monetize it. Instead of making their service more compelling to keep (as they were raising prices) they made it less compelling and still raised prices. The one thing that made cable 'take off' in the late 80s early 90s was the cable ready TV. Then the companies fell back in love with the extra box for some reason (money). But it is costing them dearly.

    But here is the BEST bit here
    http://stopthecap.com/2010/04/27/ted-turner-slams-former-time-warner-ceo-for-google-is-a-bunch-of-bullsh-comment/

    When you have the dude who practically invented the cable franchise telling you your doing it wrong... that says a lot.

    So Cable dudes look out your customers are starting to notice you charge too much for too little these days. It was a 'good deal' 20 years ago. Not so much anymore.

  5. Contract by fyngyrz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We've got a contract, so we can't just bail, but when it is up, that'll be the end of it. It isn't because of the Internet, though -- HD reception via satellite is much better quality than the vast majority of Internet streaming video. The reason why is that the programming is just terrible. The things that they put on television simply aren't the things that entertain me and mine. It doesn't matter where you get your programming if watching it makes you feel like you're wasting your time.

    We do still have the Internet if something comes up we need to know about, and it's likely to be both more timely, and available on demand, news in particular. News networks - CNN, FOX, etc. - are just pitiful. FOX is like a work of (bad) fiction, and CNN is a reach-around fest for the clueless. Half a country can be in ruins and the top story on CNN will be that some Hollywood marriage is breaking up.

    As far as what we continue to use the television for, there's still plenty without broadcast: XBox 360/HDDVD (yeah, we have a few), PS3/Bluray, Wii, DVD, and our media Mac. It isn't like we aren't entertained -- far from it. We've got an adequate collection of movies and games, too.

    Television is probably the technology that had the most potential to be a force for good in our society. Today, it seems to me to be the technology that has least lived up to its potential. Not that it hasn't matured technically, no question that it has, but that the content is, socially speaking, crap.

    There's some kind of thing that goes on in marketing, entertainment, and politics that almost always seems to go for the left side of the Gaussian, as if collecting the not-so-clever is easier than collecting the clever. Maybe it's just that simple. All I know for sure is that currently, television content is mind-numbingly awful, and on the rare occasion that they produce something worth watching, it rarely survives the seasonal cullings by the networks. And in the end, you can get all the shows on a DVD or Bluray (if you're lucky), and watch them without commercials, in very good quality, as many times as you like, and furthermore, you can legitimately loan 'em to your friends.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  6. Unforeseen consequences. by NoPantsJim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am sure the various telcos are acutely aware of this trend, and have plans in place to cover their bottom line. When subscription numbers drop drastically, be on the lookout for internet connectivity prices to skyrocket. I sincerely doubt they'll go quietly into the night as half their business fades away while the other half makes the same money as before. Remember, they have the monopoly, they can do it.

  7. Re:47" HDTV, no cable, no blue ray discs by AK+Marc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm getting ready to drop it anyway after many, many nights of "500 channels and nothing I want to watch."

    They know the answer. They refuse to offer it. All they have to do us unbundle. Want ESPN2 without ESPN? Want anything in Disney's lineup without the rest? Then unbundle. Order just what you want. Then you'll not have channels you never watch.

    One thing I've always said they should do (And should be exceedingly easy to implement) is to have channels be able to be deleted from the lineup. That way, I could, saw, delete QVC and never run across it again. Not in a menu, not in the listings, not when I channel up, never. I never watch it, so having it on my list of 500 is an annoyance. (and no, "favorites" isn't the same thing, though some implementations have come close)

    They distribution companies are used to the TV model where the advertisers are the customers and the watchers are the product. With cable/satellite, the customers are the watchers and the product is the content. But because that's the opposite of the TV model and still part of the same industry, it confuses them. They should be looking at what people want, and try to give it to them.

    And yes, I'm aware of all the complaints about unbundling. I've never seen a complaint that prevents it from being done today, just with higher cost (i.e. you could enable just ESPN2, but you'd have to pay for ESPN as well). And when a couple of the big companies do it and refuse to accept future bundled sales of channels, everyone will do it and it will improve the sales of cable and channels.

    But they'll never do it unless the FCC requires it.