Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Cord-Cutting Spikes Fivefold In Cable TV's Worst Quarter Ever (fastcompany.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the day-of-reckoning dept.

schwit1 quotes a report from Fast Company: Cable's day of reckoning has come. With all the major cable and satellite companies having reported their quarterly numbers, analyst firm MoffettNathanson put together a new cord-cutting report, and things are bad. Pay-TV providers lost an estimated 762,000 pay-TV subscribers over the first three months of this year -- five times more than they lost during the same period last year. To make matters worse, Q1 has historically been a strong season for pay TV.

156 comments

  1. estimated? by Osgeld · · Score: 0, Troll

    What does direct comcox up your bum not know how many customers they have? Talk about arrogance ... "how many customers do you have, even though you are one step away from a dna sample for service?","plenty"

    assholes

    1. Re:estimated? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      What does direct comcox up your bum not know how many customers they have?

      The estimate comes from the analyst, not from comcox.

      But the number is meaningless anyway, because many people have cable but never watch it. I am a cable subscriber because it is actually cheaper to subscribe to Internet+TV than to subscribe to just Internet. But I haven't watched live TV in years. I think they give away the TV at less than zero cost so they can quote a higher subscriber number to advertisers.

    2. Re:estimated? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Subscriber numbers are treated as a trade secret. Recent FCC Net Neutrality documents for instance redact how many residential internet customers Comcast has.

    3. Re:estimated? by Humbubba · · Score: 1

      For years I've just had just the $15/mo cheapo cable internet and it works for me. Straight OTA, and I still watch too much TV.

    4. Re:estimated? by mentil · · Score: 1

      Aside from banner ads on the Guide menu, does Comcast get any money from cable advertising? My understanding is that your standard 30-second advert revenue goes to the channel operator.

      I find it more likely that they're trying to shore up cable subscription rates to prevent stockholders from dumping their stock and running far away, I know I would be if I held Cable/Satellite operator stock. They're one telecom regulation away from no longer having a captive market, the house of cards can fall at any time. Market penetration is complete everywhere it's profitable, the only ones without cable are in rural areas where it's not profitable to expand to and the govt. won't subsidize buildout, and those people often can access satellite TV. Overall, not a good position a stockholder would want to be in.

      Also remember that broadcast/cable/satellite tend to be the last to get new tech. Most OTA broadcasts are still 720p, and broadcast was last to get the tech to support HDR color. Discs and streaming software tend to get the newer tech (4k, HDR, 3d) first. I imagine 360degree/VR broadcasts will be so many years behind streaming services (Youtube supports those already) that it won't even occur to consumers that it CAN be broadcast. Broadcast is going the way of landlines.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    5. Re: estimated? by saloomy · · Score: 1

      OTA is terrible, so does Cable. Channels? Ad breaks? Not gonna fly. I won't use a service that doesn't offer an ad-free experience. Happy to pay for it, but I won't be forced to watch ads. I think this is a very good thing. I want to watch what I want when I want it. You shot the whole season, why make me wait to watch it? There's no benefit anymore. I'm willing to pay for access. Some weeks I don't watch anything, because.... life! Other down weeks I'll binge watch GoT. I love the flexibility, and since the cable providers don't provide any and are ludicrously expensive, they are going to lose, of course. But it's a good thing. Business models will come in and fix what they refused to today.

    6. Re: estimated? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I won't use a service that doesn't offer an ad-free experience. Happy to pay for it, but I won't be forced to watch ads.

      Me too. My family went on a trip and my kids turned on the TV in the hotel room. When the first commercial came on, they thought the show was over, and were confused by the ending. I realized then that they had no idea what a "commercial" was.

      I spent the next hour explaining my childhood, and how every kid knew all the jingles, like "Coo-coo for Cocoa Puffs" , "I wish I was an Oscar-Meyer Weiner", and "Rice-a-Roni". I told them about Tony the Tiger, Mr Clean, and Cap'n Crunch, but they just rolled their eyes and started watching Youtube on their Chromebooks.

    7. Re: estimated? by Jetstream · · Score: 1

      Careful, there, you're showing your age with those jingles. On the other hand, what does it say about me that I recognize them too. ;)

    8. Re:estimated? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      the house of cards can fall at any time.

      I see what you did there.

    9. Re:estimated? by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      They don't get money from the commercials that are played but they charge stations such as CNN, ESPN, and the rest of the specialty networks based on the number of subscribers. Well, a cut of what the charge the subscribers for those channels. So if the numbers of subscribers drop then the cable/satellite companies are going to be making less from selling specialty channels. Of course the channels are going to be in trouble too because they are losing revenue.

    10. Re: estimated? by Humbubba · · Score: 4, Insightful
      saloomy said

      OTA is terrible, so does Cable. Channels? Ad breaks? Not gonna fly...

      The PC in the back records 3 shows at once, and MCE Buddy strips commercials, compresses to a VLC readable format, and nicely organizes them in folders. Long ago, when cable let me record, I had cable TV. When they wouldn't let me do that anymore, I got an antenna.

      Used to have Netflix, but I canceled. They kept dropping the stuff I wanted to see, and I got bored watching the remains over and over.

      There's still lots to record, and there's the library with years video on big hard drives. Used to have MythTV, but I'm just not into watching everything everywhere anymore. I watch too much TV anyway.

      If a new business model offers a better deal, I might change my mind.

    11. Re: estimated? by Nethead · · Score: 2

      Burma Shave.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    12. Re:estimated? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      When I went to cut the cord, they offered me basic cable plus HBO (and I can switch it to Showtime on a month to month basis) for $10 a month more.

      Ordinary cable has gotten TOO EXPENSIVE.

      I'm not sure they care tho.

      They may feel, "Well 20% of the market will pay $240 a month and that's more profit than if we charged everyone $120 a month".

      Or their just greedy and dumb.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    13. Re: estimated? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      In before some Millennial yells "They want to be called Myanmar now, respect their decisions, stop using colonial terms!"

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    14. Re: estimated? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's wrong, I work at a cable operater. I despise it, cause it's filled with politics. Anyways, Comcox has to pay channels it doesn't own to broadcast that channel. It has to pay your local stations to rebroadcast your local news, and there is an extra fee it has to pay to broadcast major league sports(mainly NFL) as they charge another premium on top of a broadcast channel(fox,NBC,CBS,etc) paying the NFL to carry the broadcast. To broadcast a show the winners are the networks. I don't care about commercials; thing is, the only thing I really watch on TV is baseball.
      People villify cable operaters, which some of it is merited, it is a little over priced, but as more and more people sub to a service, it's budget goes up, content owners e.g. HBO, showtime, whatever see that want a cut, renegotiate their contract getting more money. That service wanting to maintain growth must increase prices to accommodate the more expensive contracts to keep it's customers happy with the amount of options available for consumption. I mean look at Netflix and how they have raised prices from '10 to now. Each time it's "the last time" so they can maintain content. Getting big is good, getting bloated is bad. Netflix is trash though, at least imo. I use prime occasionally, but basically as long as I can watch my baseball team I'm fine.
      Just don't be surprised when cable dwindles your other content providers prices go up in price.

    15. Re: estimated? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      For a Close Shave Use

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    16. Re: estimated? by Baloo+Uriza · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should blame the generation that thought it would be a good idea to hand out participation trophies just for showing up.

      --
      Furries make the internet go.
    17. Re:estimated? by Baloo+Uriza · · Score: 1

      I think it's just greedy and dumb. I pay Cox $80/mo for 150Mbps. For comparison, that's about the same price my mother is paying Frontier for gigabit (and they keep giving her basic TV for free when she calls to drop the TV since she doesn't really watch that much). Needless to say, my cable company can suck my Cox.

      --
      Furries make the internet go.
    18. Re: estimated? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Every generation fucks up education more than the one that preceded it. Just wait what kind of monsters the Millennials will produce.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    19. Re: estimated? by kilodelta · · Score: 1

      A couple years back I did the math. I was paying close to $200 a month for internet, tv and phone. Told them to leave the net service (which is now $88 a month because $15 is the modem rental)

      It was stupid to have the phone ant tv when everything can be found on the net these days.

    20. Re: estimated? by DuckDodgers · · Score: 5, Informative

      The killer difference between Netflix and Comcast/DirecTV/Dish Network (the only three I can get at my house) is honest advertising and billing. With Netflix, the price advertised is what you pay, end of story. With the others, the price advertised is a fancy and you have to check your bill carefully every month because they start playing games and introducing fees and package changes. And if you're not willing to call up sales and customer retention departments and chew out some hapless entry level representative every six months, they will keep jacking prices until you're paying $180 per month for something that said "$30 per month" on the original sales brochure.

    21. Re: estimated? by mrscorpio · · Score: 1

      Why would you rent for $15 when you can buy for $75?

    22. Re: estimated? by torkus · · Score: 1

      They shot themselves in the foot ~10 years ago when they all "went digital" to help "provide better service" which basically meant they could charge tons of extra fees for cable boxes, DVR, etc. which were locked to their system...and where you couldn't just plug in a TV and watch.

      They should have jumped right on the streaming bandwagon from day one. They had (have) the tech to do so after all - digital cable isn't broadcast like old school analog (where all channels are there all the time and you tune the one you want). But no...they wanted to preserve a dying business model just like MP3s over CDs and music streaming services over radio.

      And ever since all the content producers basically gave netflix (Etc.) the finger for so much...they went to make their own content. And guess what? It's working.

      Cable TV is a joke these days. 100's of bundled channels that no one wants. "options" to unbundle that just just adds significant cost. Overpriced cable box/DVR rental, limited computer/mobile device viewing options, etc. etc. etc. I gave up on TV a long time ago. Between a few streaming services and BT I've no need for it.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    23. Re: estimated? by Gilgaron · · Score: 2

      Do you block all the ads on the chromebooks? I know Youtube ads are usually at the beginning of the video but I'd think that analogy would've worked.

    24. Re: estimated? by torkus · · Score: 1

      Every generation fucks up education more than the one that preceded it. Just wait what kind of monsters the Millennials will produce.

      They won't. They're too busy protesting for equality in the pupae stage for the northern woodland spotted butterfly or somesugh stupidity to have children. Hipsters though...watch out for them.

      On a slightly more serious notes, very often the educated, intelligent, successful people are having fewer (or no) children while the poor uneducated are having many. There's a day of reckoning coming.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    25. Re: estimated? by torkus · · Score: 1

      BYoM.

      You can buy a cable modem for $50-100 (or less depending on the lanes you need) and your ROI is under a year. Not sure why anyone pays such a premium for a commodity device.

      My crystal ball says that cable providers will start jacking up rates on unbundled internet even more and introducing data caps (or more restrictive ones) as the cable subs drop so they can balance. $200/month internet service (and per-GB usage fees) here we come. Despite cell providers finally moving away from that nonsense.

      Maybe cell providers eventually replace cable providers?

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    26. Re: estimated? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're doomed. Well they are... we'll be gone.

    27. Re:estimated? by supremebob · · Score: 1

      Considering that Comcast owns NBC and all of it's channels, I'd imagine that they still make a good chunk of money off of TV advertising and TV product placement.

    28. Re: estimated? by Outta_the_way_peck! · · Score: 1

      Pretty sure it is already upon us. We just had an election between Trump and Hillary. How much lower can we go?

    29. Re: estimated? by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      There was a movie about this, kinda like a future documentary that has turned reality since.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    30. Re: estimated? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Start? Comcast already does this. We pay $165 a month to get uncapped internet.

      Eat bag of sucks Comcast.

    31. Re:estimated? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For years I've just had just the $15/mo cheapo cable internet and it works for me. Straight OTA, and I still watch too much TV.

      Coincidence, but today - cinco de Mayo - marks the 6th anniversary since I dropped cable, and went OTA & streaming. The world did not end, I'm still breathing, and I have more money at the end of the month.

    32. Re: estimated? by AntronArgaiv · · Score: 1

      If it's Comcast, you can buy your own modem. (be sure to get a receipt when you return theirs -- one of their favorite tricks is to wait a couple months, then star billing you for their modem again, or claim it hasn't been returned and bill you for full replacement cost)

    33. Re:estimated? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats Cumcocks

    34. Re:estimated? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      So what do you need 150Mbps for? I was able to cut the cost $360 a year by dropping to 25Mbps and I don't notice a difference. I suspect I'm getting over 25Mbps for one thing. I had a multi-gigabyte download finish in under 10 minutes a couple weeks ago. Maybe more stuff is cached locally.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    35. Re: estimated? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There isn't anything "killer" about netflix. Basically I can stream any of it's content for free except for their original content which is utter garbage.

    36. Re: estimated? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      But how do you get TV then, legally? Netflix drops things, usually because the license is pulled and not because Netflix wants a smaller library, but it's still got more I want to see than I'll ever be able to get to. Adn $10/mo is a better deal than any other possible legal option.

    37. Re: estimated? by Humbubba · · Score: 1
      Darinbob said

      But how do you get TV then, legally?

      There's more than 25 stations over-the-air. Mostly crap, but there are gems here and there. And I've got over a decade of TV recorded. I can pick whichever Dr. Who, cartoon, monster, detective, superdude or smeghead to waste the weekend with. Then there's Amazon Prime Video, YouTube, Creative Commons, France24, DW, NHK, Sky ... and of course, Kodi. I stay totally legal with Kodi. I know about Exodus, Phoenix, etc., but Metalkettle ain't even installed. Stuff like this that's giving the UK a shit-fit. If these addons were were legal, Kodi would rule the world.

  2. Fuck Cable by chill · · Score: 2

    I think I speak for lot of people when I say fuck Comcast.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:Fuck Cable by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Comcast had over $20 BILLION in revenue this quarter. I don't think they are worried much.

    2. Re:Fuck Cable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Of course they aren't worried, they are part of a very small cartel that provides a basically-required service (high speed Internet).

      I am sure they are annoyed that they are losing money on TV, but not worried.

      Be that as it may, to quote an Anonymous Coward of yore:

      If I were stuck in a room with a gun, two bullets, and facing Osama Bin Laden, Hitler, and Comcast....

      I would shoot Comcast. Twice.

    3. Re:Fuck Cable by Patent+Lover · · Score: 0

      Not Republicans.

    4. Re: Fuck Cable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would probably add I would shoot Comcast twice, bash them with the butt of the rifle repeatedly and then kick em while their down.. For a company that make 20B a quarter they are extremely shitty and condescending towards their "customers".
      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KMcny_pixDw

    5. Re:Fuck Cable by lgw · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Most people hate their cable company. But they stick with it for ESPN.

      To a large extent, the current exodus from Cable is really an exodus from ESPN. Why the sudden shift? ESPN became political. Most hardcore watchers of professional sports are conservative (something like a 65/35 split), so ESPNs decision to hit progressive talking points hard at every opportunity, fire commenters for offending progressives, and so on, was the sort of bone-headed decision only an MBA could make.

      The conservative blog comment section and message boards I read have been growing in anger over this for more than a year now, to the point now I see a constant stream of "you know what, I stopped watching $SPORT and I found I didn't miss it. I went and threw the ball with my kid instead - should have been doing that more all along. Goodbye ESPN!"

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    6. Re:Fuck Cable by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

      Comcast isn't losing money on TV either. In fact, Comcast added TV subscribers! 80k this quarter.

    7. Re:Fuck Cable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ESPN has been available without cable through services like Sling and Playstation Vue for a while now. Competitors like the recently launched Youtube TV also picked up a shit ton of sports coverage including: ESPN, Fox Sports, Comcast Sports (not even kidding), Golf Channel, and more! There is zero reason to stick with any cable company for sports, so long as you have decent Internet service where you live.

    8. Re:Fuck Cable by Nethead · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not sure if I agree that it's all down to ESPN politics but I will agree that it could be a good percentage of the cause. I'm not much of a sport watcher except for local games so I don't know that demographic that well.

      I haven't bought cable in 10 years because I don't like having to schedule my time around shows or pay for a DVR, and the main reason is commercials. When I travel for work and alone I hardly ever turn on the TV unless there is some breaking news or something that could directly effect me.

      I did buy a nice Roko TV on Amazon for a steal and paid for Netflix. It's perfect for when I need some down time on the couch. One tenth the cost of cable and I can retire it when I wish. I have Amazon Prime too for the shipping and Kindle services so there is all that content too.

      You're spot on with the last remark, get out and do something with the people you love. You're not going to be on your death bed saying I wish I could hang on for the next season of Doctor Who. (Okay, I might say that.) But really, live your life, not some writer's idea of one.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    9. Re:Fuck Cable by cshay · · Score: 1

      Not really true. A lot of cable companies do a bang up (and exclusive) job of covering the local baseball team. You might be able to get the games themselves on MLB.TV but not all the behind the scenes exclusive interviews and such.

    10. Re:Fuck Cable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Most people hate their cable company. But they stick with it for ESPN"
      Most people don't watch ESPN; they only are listed as Subscribers because the Cable Companies force it on their Tiers.
      Check the actual average Nielsen Ratings. Top-watched ESPN Sports broadcasts, such as the recent NBA Playoffs, got between 3-5 Million views. That's out of a US population of some 320 Million.
      That's a Viewership of around 1%. The other ~99% found much better things to do.
      And it has _always_ been this way. Actual ESPN Ratings have always been in the gutter. It has nothing to do with whether they are Liberal or Conservative. It has to do with the fact that most people just don't watch Sports.

    11. Re: Fuck Cable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the fuck wants to watch a bunch of nigsrun around on wood anyways?

    12. Re:Fuck Cable by speedlaw · · Score: 2

      Actually, ESPN was what made me cut the cord. They'd already scrambed the signal...making me rent a box I didn't need prior, to pay for their DRM decisions...I can't believe piracy was a big deal in my area. Kudos for the way they implemented the FCC required clear channel carriage of OTA...by making the virtual channels incomprehensible. So, when the "free" boxes became $8 EACH per month, and then they added a $6 line item "sports fee", I realized that I was basically paying $75 per year for ESPN, a channel I never, ever watch. It was interesting, the long game. Digitize the whole thing, a good idea, but instead of clear QAM, which most TV sets could accept, scramble the whole thing. Get FCC waiver for two years of "free" boxes, then $8 per month in perpetuity. Three TV sets ? (suburban house), $24 x 12... $288.00 per year increase. Add the "sports fee" and $84.00 magically disappears. Oh, and they didn't raise "rates", officially. The OTA antenna, installed (ok, DIY but cable, antenna and parts) worked out to $130...one time. Add Netflix and Amazon Prime....which you'd use anyway.... I now pay $135 per month for broadband, and three landlines-and that is half the price of FiOs, which also runs down the street, for the same service.

    13. Re:Fuck Cable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...I can't believe piracy was a big deal in my area. "
      It _never_ has been. What this scrambling of Clear-QAM is primarily all about is reducing Labor Costs. It takes a Driver and a Truck to roll out and disconnect people who are late paying their Bills, and then reconnecting them up again. "Smart" Meters on Electricity, Gas, and Water are getting installed for the same reason. Now some Keyboard Monkey in India can cut them off in seconds instead.
      The really sleazy thing is that they can now charge us monthly for the very energy sucking Box needed to cut their business expenses. Are those Savings passed on to us in any way? Hell no!

      I wish that I could go OTA, but this neighborhood went Cable as a Cooperative back in the Fifties, because otherwise there was no "OTA" without an Antenna stuck ~100' high, just to pick up, barely, a couple of Sacramento stations. (And yes, there were holdouts that did just that... until the Seventies. Then laws got passed that banned such Antennas... unless one had a Ham License.)
      I thought that when Astound came in a few years back, that Comcast, which had sucked up our little Cooperative, might have some competition. And then in January, Astound started scrambling Clear-QAM, requiring an energy sucking Box for every TV. FWIW, the Boxes are made by Cisco. They consume 6 Watts each, and can't be turned off. That ~50kWH per Box every year, and guess who pays for that?
      They are all parasitic bastards.

    14. Re:Fuck Cable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't speak for me... cuz I say FUCK COMCAST BLOODY!!

    15. Re:Fuck Cable by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      ESPN has been going down hill rapidly.

      For me the last straws were -- firing most of the NFL crew last year and then firing Trent Dilfer this year.

      Secondarily, they have fired their most experienced hosts of Sportscenter, so that we now have useless children telling us about sports.

      Ease up on the gasoline, ESPN, if you want that bonfire to ever go out.

      --
      I come here for the love
  3. No surprise really by danomac · · Score: 2

    Back in the 90s when I had a ton of channels for $25 it wasn't a big deal. Now that same package is $100 or more. Considering a lot of channels duplicate content as it is, people are just tired of paying through the nose for it.

    Add to that youtube/chromecast/etc and OTA in most major centres... well, there's just no reason to pay that much for TV.

    1. Re:No surprise really by Osgeld · · Score: 4, Insightful

      every single channel on cable is 90% reruns, we didnt have cable for a couple years, then we did cause it was just about free with our internet, you would think after a couple years, there was something new to watch

      nope first thing I saw once it was hooked up was a show I had already seen, how the fuck do you manage that

    2. Re:No surprise really by mentil · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hopefully someone will automate the 'tv show licensing bureaucrats' out of a job, and replace reruns with Bollywood dramas and Japanese gameshows. There's plenty of stuff made around the world that never airs elsewhere that could be replacing the reruns.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    3. Re: No surprise really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try searching google for the word inflation.
      Also, prices were closer to $50 for about 2/3rds the channels you get now, far fewer movie channels, no on demand options, and at least as many repeats and bullshit programs as today. And no internet. And it's not hard to find a tv plus internet package today for about $60 with far more programming than you could get in the 90s.

    4. Re:No surprise really by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Why don't you choose a show with a different name than one you saw before?

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    5. Re: No surprise really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try searching google for the word inflation.
      Also, prices were closer to $50 for about 2/3rds the channels you get now, far fewer movie channels, no on demand options, and at least as many repeats and bullshit programs as today. And no internet. And it's not hard to find a tv plus internet package today for about $60 with far more programming than you could get in the 90s.

      Inflation my ass. In five years, my bill went from $89 to $165 for the exact same service. One year, three months after my just-because annual increase, they decided to add an extra $7 for renting the cable modem I'd had for five years. I had enough and dropped them rather than paying $172. I'm now cable free for almost four years. They send me mailers almost daily "offering" me my original $89 deal. The only problem for them is that I have a long memory and I already played that game once.

    6. Re:No surprise really by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I am.

      On YouTube.

      Because cable doen't offer them.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:No surprise really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There isn't that much to watch, I average an hour or two a week. But some of the new productions coming from cable companies the past few years are the best TV has ever had to offer. But it's basically a single 3 month season per network per year of decent new stuff, and that's it. Fargo has just come back on on FX after a long period with nothing worth watching, and a new series of Better Call Saul is on the way on AMC after that, with Mr Robot following it on USA.

    8. Re: No surprise really by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      $25 in 1990 is worth $48 now. Inflation doesn't explain an increase to $100.

  4. Whoopdedo. by sims+2 · · Score: 4, Funny

    They don't need to change their business plans they just need more ads! And more forced bundling! No a la carte! People won't cancel their cable if it makes their internet cost more than having internet and cable! /s

    --
    Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    1. Re: Whoopdedo. by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      They don't even need to do full-blown a-la-carte... they could just offer their mid & top-tier packages for $20-25/month less without losing a cent by making ESPN, the regional sports networks, and local OTA channels optional & passing along their actual savings to customers who exclude them. I have a perfectly good antenna & HDHomeRun (and would get a Cablecard-compatible HDHR-Prime if I got cable) with Windows Media Center as my DVR, so there's no reason I should have to pay an extra $5-10/month just so I can get my local channels from the same coax cable as CNN & Comedy Central.

    2. Re:Whoopdedo. by Excelcia · · Score: 2

      Like most modern aggressive business strategies, the cable companies' policies work in the short to medium term - but trading your customers' good will for profit isn't sustainable. It doesn't matter what barrel you think you have your customers over, sooner or later an alternative will come up and then the customers you have been bending over will feel not a lick of loyalty.

      However, that being said, there is zero chance they are going to suddenly admit they were wrong and try and actually win customers back. No, what has (and will continue) to happen is they will continue the aggressive policies and blame the customer. They will blame piracy for the loss of business. They will try and scare people into not downloading shows, and they will become a more and more vocal lobby for more draconian measures to stem what they call piracy.

      I have zero sympathy for them. I just wish so many of them weren't also internet providers and in a position to continue the upward trend on those prices.

    3. Re: Whoopdedo. by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      IIUC they are required by law to carry some OTA channels. IMHO they should tell all the OTA that demand a carriage fee to shove it they get paid enough in advertising as it is.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    4. Re: Whoopdedo. by DutchSter · · Score: 1

      The Dish FlexPacks are slowly heading that way. The base package does not include kids channels, RSNs, locals, or ESPN.

      When I switched to it I was adamant that we did not want ESPN, nor would we pay for it. We'd cut the cord before we paid the ESPN tax again. The lady said you wouldn't believe how often they hear that.

      We get locals OTA (plus many that Dish didn't carry) and with an OTA card for our Dish receiver you hardly know the difference from how they used to be. I did get the RSN to watch baseball but the lady helpfully pointed out that I'm free to add or remove packs anytime so she suggested that as soon as the season is over I should drop the RSN and not pay for it until the next season starts.

    5. Re: Whoopdedo. by AF_Cheddar_Head · · Score: 1

      Just waiting for them to make NBCSN and NHL channel available in a Flex Pack and that is the way I am going.

  5. More ads, higher prices by Moof123 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Dropping revenue means they need to squeeze the remaining schlubs by playing more ads, and increasing monthly fees. No dropping of revenue can be tolerated by these guys.

    I know it will still be years off, but I still welcome their impending demise.

    1. Re:More ads, higher prices by emaname · · Score: 1

      You nailed it, Moof123. And they'll probably get some legislation passed to "protect" their market as well.

      I use OTA. Yeah, the ads suck enormously, I know only too well. But I had cable once almost 30 years ago. I just don't want to give them more money.

      Anyhow, I'm expecting the cable companies to get legislation passed that will make using OTA illegal or incredibly expensive by getting a tax imposed on those who use OTA.

      Free market. Yeah, right. The corporations make the laws now and monopolies are considered to be a good thing.

      --
      An effective "democracy" creates the illusion the people have a say in their government.
    2. Re: More ads, higher prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to the tv world as we know it in the UK,the poxy BBC have their wonderful tv licenceing system,worth £4 billion a year,but it's a tax on tv's in all but name,you realy have to fight hard and have equipment properly worked on to prove to them and their out sourced private firm thugs that you cannot receive ANY bbc info or programmes at all.
      I can see a tv tax being introduced in the USA after much lobbying/bribery...
      Me,I'm a radio person,since its roll out I have watched a total of 17 items on youtit,11 of them in how to fix mobile phones..
      No Netflix,no Amazon prime,no nothing,no DVD/blueray,absolutely nothing that does visuals,I have a very reasonable un-limited(200gb+ per month,before throttleing kicks in) that costs me £25/$34 per month.
      Imho,there hasn't been a decent new film or program made in the last 30 years,my partner watches series like supernatural etc after about on a portable DVD player,it all makes me yawn after about 2 minutes,they all seem made by cretins,full of holes with the most wooden "performers they can find..
      Tv/films =yawn.
      Even so called "documentary" progs are rubbish today,I learnt much accurate,up to date scientific knowledge from watching BBC horizons etc,no longer possible with the awful,inaccurate, biased rubbish produced today..

    3. Re:More ads, higher prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dropped cable TV years ago. The family didn't mind as they had Netflix for the vegetative viewing. Within two years I was paying as much for broadband as I did for the TV+net combo. The only slight saving was no monthly STB/DVR rental and the associated state taxes and communication fees that come with TV services.

      Now over five years later, I've moved country where reasonable OTA channels are an option. My kids still won't watch TV though. Why? Because of the adverts. Which is nice to see.

    4. Re: More ads, higher prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok granddad, finish your cocoa and stop ranting on the internet. It's time for your meds then bed.

  6. Channels vs programs by sit1963nz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No one actually cares about channels anymore.

    Netflix and the likes has made people realise they watch programs, and, even worse for the advertising industry, they watch programs with no advert interruptions.

    I go back to "linearTV" and it just annoys the hell out of me, so it back to Netflix we go.

    1. Re:Channels vs programs by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      This makes me wonder if there is already a service where I can put in what shows I watch and I can get a minimal cost covering set of services to watch them.

      I supose the worst case if I'm watching less than a couple dozen shows per year is to just buy the dvds.

    2. Re:Channels vs programs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alas there isn't. TV channels are bundled not because of the cable company, but the mega-corps that own the channels will only allow a cable/satellite company to have one if they take all the crap too. Until that is outlawed, all TV subscribers are paying for shit they don't want. It's all down to the advertisers that want X time-slots. Ban all advertising, which has zero value and is added into everything we buy, and then we'll be able to get closer to a consumer friendly TV service.

      But that won't happen, and TV will continue to die, pander to bored idiots at home, and spread fake news to push political agendas.

    3. Re:Channels vs programs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's actually NP-complete (set covering problem) :)

    4. Re:Channels vs programs by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      You can buy individual shows on Amazon or iTunes if subscribing to HBO Now or whatever doesn't make sense.

    5. Re:Channels vs programs by torkus · · Score: 1

      Jailbroken firestick for one
      bit torrent is another ... or did you not want to include piracy (arrrr)? :)

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
  7. Cost by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    I can't afford cable, so first chance I got I cancelled it. My internet is $80/mo no matter what I do. After that they start getting nervous that I'm gonna buy a cell phone with HDMI out and watch Netflix that way. Last I had cable (for my kid to watch shows so she could chat with her friends about 'em) it was $80/mo from Dish and they were set to raise it to $100 soon. Sorry folks, after 20 years of stagnant wages I can't blow that kinda money on TV. Netflix is less than 1/10th that.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Cost by tepples · · Score: 1

      Netflix is less than 1/10th that.

      But is it still significantly cheaper once you've added CBS All Access, Hulu, Amazon Prime, and Seeso? Or once you add a season ticket to your local minor league ice hockey team to make up for the lack of NBCSN?

    2. Re:Cost by geekd · · Score: 2

      We canceled cable about 6 months ago. We have SlingTV (and pay extra for the sports package during NFL season), Netflix, Hulu+ and HBO. All those together are still cheaper than cable was.

      Even better, we cancel HBO when there's not a series on that we watch, and it's a simple matter of a website click. When it's time to turn it back on, same thing.

      With the addition of a $30 digital antenna, there is nothing we used to watch that we can't get now.

    3. Re: Cost by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I live alone, I almost went the cellphone only route.

      My internet went from $55 -> $90 (when they dropped the lower speed internet only plan). They had a $60 plan with TV (a few channels) and internet. I told them I'd take it if they would keep the TV out of the plan, it took a lot of complaining, but they eventually did it.

      Cable is worth less than zero to me, I have to deal with a box, I lose an HDMI hole, and if I lose the remote I owe them money.

      Telling them that for $35 I could get more data on my phone (High Def streaming on T-Mobile) was what I had to do.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    4. Re:Cost by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      Not if you did them all at once, but you could rotate through them in succession and binge the shows of interest. We only maintain a monthly subscription for Netflix and Amazon Prime (although the latter not really for the video feed). The others are just a 'free monthly trial' binge away.

    5. Re:Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox, PBS, CW, etc. are all free with this metal thing in the attic.

      Hulu $12, so that's $20 a month.
      Amazon Prime? Free since I already have it for deliveries (calculated as a cheaper option than shipping on the number of packages).

      I'll keep playing your game though,
      Showtime: $8 on Amazon (less than the $15 on cable, oops)
      PLaystation Vue: $35 with auto DVR to the cloud! (Hello Hockey and Baseball!)

      Total: $63 so yes it is still less. Even when I add HBO back for GoT it will be $78 which is still less than that original $80 or raised $100 figure.

    6. Re:Cost by DuckDodgers · · Score: 2

      Speaking for myself:

      * We already had Amazon Prime while we had paid cable, partly for the including video streaming content but largely because of the free shipping and my wife's addiction to Kindle Unlimited and Amazon Music. So it's not "Comcast/DirecTV/Dish" vs. "Amazon Prime + ....", Amazon Prime is already in the budget.
      * We also already had Netflix while we had paid television, for Daredevil and Orange Is the New Black and a selection of kid shows. So again, it's not "Comcast/DirecTV/Dish" vs. "Netflix + ....", Netflix is already in the budget.
      * So all I'm paying for is $400 for a Tivo and $12.50 per month Tivo channel package subscription for our Over-The-Air antenna. We get CBS, NBC, ABC, and Fox that way so we can record major sporting events, So You Think You Can Dance, and the main channel shows we like. (Granted, this only works if you live someplace that can receive all four channels by antenna. I do.).

      But the crucial thing to me is honest pricing. Amazon Prime, Netflix, Tivo, and for that matter CBS All Access, Sling.tv, Hulu, etc... are straightforward with their prices. The paid television services bury you in bullshit, the advertised price has no relation to what the bill is and after the promotional period expires they will find excuses to jack up the bill a bit at a time every few months forever. The only way to fight it is to set aside an hour or two every six months to waste on the phone with someone getting back your original rates. Since that's never going to change, they're never getting another cent out of me.

    7. Re:Cost by tepples · · Score: 1

      Total: $63 so yes it is still less.

      It's not less than -$2 (negative two dollars), which is what the local ISP charges for the "upgrade" from Internet-only service to a bundle of Internet and basic TV service.

    8. Re:Cost by tepples · · Score: 1

      You don't need Prime for free shipping on Amazon if you wait until your order total reaches $35 before submitting the order.

      The paid television services bury you in bullshit, the advertised price has no relation to what the bill is

      Doesn't subscribing to Internet access in the first place bury you in exactly the same bullshit?

    9. Re:Cost by DuckDodgers · · Score: 2

      My internet access bill from Comcast only has one headache that I have to battle every few years: they periodically add a modem rental fee even though I own my own cable modem. Otherwise the bill is very simple, one charge for $87.50 (for 200 Mbit down, 10 Mbit up).

      If you look at a Comcast, DirecTV, or Dish Network television brochure they advertise specific prices in bright colors. But the fine print adds a local network fee, a sports fee, an equipment rental fee, and a DVR service fee. They also charge $2-$5 extra per month if you don't use direct debit for your payments. So the $29.99 for the first year is actually $64.99 for the first year and the $59.99 for the second year is actually $94.99 for the second or similar.

      And then the immediate month after the two year contract expires, the bill jumps to $117. And then you call to cancel, and they counter by offering better and better deals until they're asking you to pay $52 total per month for another year. So they were charging me $117 when they could profitably charge me $52? No thanks, fucker. I'll never do business with your company again.

    10. Re:Cost by plague911 · · Score: 1

      I don't know anyone who pays for ANY of that besides amazon prime, any prime is not for the TV.

    11. Re:Cost by guacamole · · Score: 1

      Netflix does not even close to the coverage you get from a full service cable package.

      There is always someone in my household who likes politics. So we gotta have CNN. Fox, BBC, MSNBC, OneAmerica, etc. There is always someone who likes movies and shows, so we gotta have AMC, FX, HBO, Cinemax, at very least. There are people who enjoy soccer, NBA, winter sports, and Formula 1. So we gotta have pretty much every sports channel. There are people who like cartoons, comedy, travel, nature, pet, and cooking shows, so we gotta have all those special interest channels too. So in the end having a full menu of channels for 120bucks isn't so bad for a large household. And you can still stream it all, or pre-record on DVR.

      I have netflix and amazon prime accounts too, and I know they don't even close to variety of the cable.

    12. Re:Cost by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      But is it still significantly cheaper once you've added CBS All Access, Hulu, Amazon Prime, and Seeso?

      Probably not, but if your such a heavy TV viewer that you feel the need to subscribe to all the services, then why in the world would you cut the cable? Cable makes total sense for those people.

      But most people (in my experience) don't have such heavy habits, and for those people, cable TV makes no economic sense. The only thing that's changed is that more of those people no longer need to pay for the full banquet when all they want is a couple of slices of the roast.

    13. Re: Cost by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      I told them I'd take it if they would keep the TV out of the plan, it took a lot of complaining, but they eventually did it.

      I don't understand -- why didn't you take the $60 plan as offered and just not connect the cable TV box? That's what I do, and I didn't have to argue with anyone.

    14. Re: Cost by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Because I need to store a box for them.

      I would rather waste my time now, then have a chore that creeps up in a year or so. I don't want to store other people's junk. My basement isn't safe enough from moisture to make it worth the box.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    15. Re:Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no such thing as digital antenna. There are only antennas. You bought a gold plated hdmi cable. Dont let them fool you again.

  8. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are viewers watching less? Or are viewers getting their content from other sources?

    1. Re:Why? by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      yes

    2. Re:Why? by Jetstream · · Score: 1

      I can't speak for others, but I watch very little tv these days - broadcast, cable, or internet. Very few shows appeal to me anymore, plus they took off COPS, which was literally the only show I watched regularly. (Okay, it might be on FX now, but I'm not paying for cable just for one show.) Of course, it doesn't help that I work in the evenings, so I am rarely at home for primetime. But again, most of the shows either suck or are getting very redundant.

    3. Re:Why? by known_coward_69 · · Score: 1

      you can get live TV for $20 a month. I had sling for $25 and switched to AT&T unlimited and then got direct tv now for $25 a month

      next year look for cheaper bundles with no sports. MLB Advanced Media owns the streaming infrastructure along with the commercial CDN's and everyone else just makes the players and does the customer facing stuff that runs on top of it

    4. Re:Why? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      People, particularly the most desirable group aged 18-24, are watching less TV and spending more time online.

      In sum, between 2011 and 2016, Q4 traditional TV viewing by 18-24-year-olds dropped by almost 10 hours a week, or by roughly 1 hour and 25 minutes per day. In percentage terms, Q4 traditional TV viewing by 18-24-year-olds was down by 7.1% year-over-year and has now fallen by 39% since 2011. In other words, in the space of 5 years, almost 40% of this age group’s traditional TV viewing time has migrated to other activities or streaming.

      http://www.marketingcharts.com...

  9. Yes, probably more and more abuse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In 2014, Comcast was voted worse than Monsanto!
    Consumerist stories about Comcast.
    Comcast: 2014 worst company in America.

    Comcast is disliked so much, the company is now calling itself Xfinity.

  10. Value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Companies are going to have to justify their cost to continue being in family budgets.

    I recently had a revelation: I was paying more for telecom than any other thing. Between land line phone, cell phone, cable TV, and internet, I was paying almost $500/mo.

    Land line phone is an obvious place to cut, but cable TV is quickly becoming just as redundant.

    I ended up cutting back to basic cable. How long will I keep even that?

    1. Re:Value by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      We cut back our packages/tiers for a year or two, and it would seem like we'd sacrifice channels we liked in return for a lower bill, only to have the cable company hike the rates. After a couple of years of that, I finally said "Fuck it!" and canceled it entirely. It was a bit of a shock at first, since you get so used to the concept of channel surfing, but two years in and I can't imagine ever going back to cable or satellite. Looking back, it was never worth the money.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Value by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      I'm not quite ready to cut the cord yet, but the handwriting is on the wall. I'm watching more on Netflix & Hulu, and less on cable. And the same show is both shorter and more enjoyable on those ad-free services.

      To add insult to injury, I was looking over my expenses the other day, and though cable isn't my biggest expense, it is the biggest expense that I could reasonably cut.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  11. Comcast is horrible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have Comcast broadband only because I have no other options. If I did, I would choose any service but Comcast. I would never buy any other service from them and yet because I don't I pay dearly for my broadband. My little town of 3000 I believe Comcast TV was out of service for over 3 days for some and the trunk lines are pathetically outdated and in need of updates. Broadband can go for weeks without anyone addressing problems. Its pointless to complain because they do nothing. I am hoping someday Comcast just sells out my town to some company that actually cares about customers. I was on a chat with Comcast last week and the rep just left the chat when I wasn't interested in signing up for more services. I told her, you can't provide good service with what I have. Why would I sign up for more?

    1. Re:Comcast is horrible by zerocool512 · · Score: 1

      Oh, if someone did that to me, I would keep chatting in over and over and over giving them bad surveys as they disconnect from me. I would do that in as much free time as I could.

      --
      If techs didn't disagree with each other, then Microsoft would rule the world.
    2. Re:Comcast is horrible by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      Funny thing. Comcast's service has always been bulletproof for me. Fifteen years in one house, one Internet connection outage lasting more than hour.

      It's just the sales and billing department that deserve a spot in the fifteenth level of hell.

  12. Cable needs to improve its streaming by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    There is no reason that cable channels couldn't survive the transition to streaming perfectly well by making it as easy for customers to stream as to watch on air. Set up a consistent verify-with-provider interface that works for all customers, show the same ads online as on the air, and gain new customers with the ability to bingewatch and time-shift.

    But no. There are a lot of networks in my cable tier that don't include my cable provider in their signon list. Those are the ones I have to watch on Kodi, in which case their commercials don't get aired.

    1. Re:Cable needs to improve its streaming by guacamole · · Score: 1

      A lot of my Uverse channels now allow streaming. They have Android apps for HBO, Cinemax, AMC, FX, NBC, Fox, ESPN, etc which show reruns, and the "Uverse" app for showing live content. Moreover, streaming over Uverse app does not count against your cellular data. The only issue I have with all of these streaming apps is that none of them allows to skip the commercials, which serves as a incentive for me to get off myass and go downstairs to the living room where I can see a 40-minute recorded show on the DVR without having to watch 20 minutes of commercials.

    2. Re:Cable needs to improve its streaming by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Demanding the right to skip commercials is changing the nature of the product, and I have no interest in doing that. All I want is the right to stream any network that supports streaming and is in my cable subscription.

  13. And by coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ESPN just laid off 100 employees holding on-air or content-producing positions.

    1. Re:And by coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great news for all the years I was forced to pay.

  14. America is tired of fake news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fox/CNN/MSNBC/ESPN are all just shitty anti-American YouTube channels now. The funny thing is, that's all they ever were. If you want to see sad pandas, watch Trump berate CNN reporters on CNN's own feeds with CNN's logo in the corner. Feels like it's right out of a ridiculous Weird Al movie.

    1. Re:America is tired of fake news by PW2 · · Score: 1

      I mainly gave up cable due to cable news and the talking heads who had an inability to answer a question without preceding it with: "well", "you know", "look", or "well, you know, look..."

      The extra $60 to $80 a month I now have is just a bonus.

  15. Who knew? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2
    Cable television really sucks? Who knew?

    When the "hot new shows" are Honey BooBoo's mother losing weight for her pedophile boyfriend, and Sassy African American women flashing attitude, over the top flamers, and weird white guys in Alaska and down south, and ESPN is now the 5 people arguing at once and poker channel that by themselves represents around 10 dollars of every bill and a dozen channels selling jewelry- who knew? Cable TV needs ala carte channel selection, and then they might survive, and a lot of worthless shit can go away.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    1. Re:Who knew? by guacamole · · Score: 1

      I think people are now suffering these days from the embarrassment of riches.

      For a large household, something like our 120USD a month Uverse TV package should be a must. So what do we get?

      Pretty much every movie channel.
      Every news channel
      Every sports channel
      Every pet, travel, cooking, comedy, music, and cartoon channel, and tons of other special interest channels.

      We can watch it live, record on the DVR, or stream the premium channels to a table or phone, often free of data charges.

      In fact, there is so much content to see, we barely ever rent discs, and hardly every go to movie theater (maybe once or twice a year). What's the point if all the latest films will hit the cable's premium TV channels a year since release.

      The cord-cutting streaming options don't come close to this. I understand that a single guy or a young couple won't necessarily cough out so much money for cable subscription, but for a large household it works out pretty nicely.

  16. Comcast offered me $2 off per month to *add* cable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I recently called Comcast to drop my internet plan to a lower tier. As part of that hassle, they offered me $75/mo for the Xfinity tier I wanted, and $73/mo if I added TV to that.

    Essentially, trying to keep their subscriber numbers up is worth $2/mo/person to them. So, I'd assume the number of subscribers who are actually using the TV service or even *want* their TV service is far lower.

  17. DROP the price by p51d007 · · Score: 2

    Maybe if their prices were more in line with REALITY some people would consider it, but when you figure 80% of the channels, NO ONE WATCHES, and the other 20% have some lame shows, and you can get a lot of them online, why bother?

  18. Hollywood elites. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am not a trump supporter but I am sick and tired of the condescending Hollywood elite. Even sports have been saturated with politics. You can't even escape politics there.
    I can't watch a movie or tv show without thinking that there's the actor who called people they disagree with for nazis.
    I also used to watch a few late night talk shows and political comedy shows but they have all gone full retard.
    I have just logged out of watching tv or following the news.

  19. Well, at least I can still use my compression tool by kriston · · Score: 1

    Well, at least I can still use my compression tool and RG/6 cable for installing new satellite dishes.

    Oh, wait. Nevermind.

    --

    Kriston

  20. Kodi + Netflix + the internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You fuckers cant keep forcing us to buy 2524356345868 things we dont want just to get the 1 we do. Its ridiculous.

    1. Re:Kodi + Netflix + the internet by tepples · · Score: 1

      You fuckers cant keep forcing us to buy 2524356345868 things we dont want just to get the 1 we do. Its ridiculous.

      They can when the 1 is Internet and the 2524356345868 is TV for which they charge you negative dollars: $75/mo for Internet only or $73/mo for Internet and TV.

    2. Re:Kodi + Netflix + the internet by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That's still not forcing, that's just "encouragement".

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  21. satellite tv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember when the first giant dishes people bought to watch tv. They were an eyesore in your yard. The tv was decent, because you paid a flat fee for programming. Not as much advertising back then either. Most programming was the superstations like turner in Atlanta and big Chicago station and programming from the west coast as well.
    So now you get stuff you don't really want. I worked second shift most of my life. If I didn't set the DVR I would not have anything to watch when I got home. Because late at night was shopping channels, infomercials and crackpot ministers. I realized I was paying 150 a month for crap like that. What a waste. Cut the cord about 5 years ago and could care less.Local channels [uhf] Netflix and Hulu are enough. Anymore seems like a waste of my life [time] and money.

  22. Costs kill by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    I just reached a new deal with Comcast. The prices for my services were way out of control. it pays to call them every few months to see if new deals or bundles are available. It saved me a fortune.

  23. Features of dubious value by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

    Lately Comcast Xfinity has been touting features they think set them apart from the competition. Voice Remote. Being able to watch on-demand on any device, and a few other things.

    But the thing is, never in my entire life have I ever had a desire to TALK to my remote control, and I can't think of a reason, short of losing my mind entirely, that I would ever do that. The idea of uttering "Show me sitcoms" makes me want to die inside.

    I don't know anyone else who has ever wanted this feature, either. But Xfinity thinks it's fucking amazing.

    Video on any device is a joke. I don't have time to watch video on the go, driving, or at work.

    What I want from Xfinity is a stable internet connection with decent speed, and I get that. They don't need to offer me more. I don't want more. I would like a cheaper bill but I'd also like a giant robot, and we cannot always have what we want.

    --
    Sig for hire.
    1. Re:Features of dubious value by postagoras · · Score: 1

      Because you like digging through all the menus or "typing" on the keyboard for search? Say "Midsummer Night's Dream" and you are there.

  24. Re:Well, at least I can still use my compression t by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

    Well, at least I can still use my compression tool and RG/6 cable for installing new satellite dishes.

    Oh, wait. Nevermind.

    True story: When Comcast came to wire my house for cable a few years ago, the installer opened a brand-new 1000ft roll of RG6QS with carrier wire, used what he needed to do the drop install, and left the remaining spool behind when he was done. His service truck had about 20 rolls of cable in it. Any chance he got to ditch a spool, he would. It was taking up too much room.

    So I now have 700ft of Comcast-grade RG6QS on a spool. It's quite good stuff.

    The installer did a fine job. I let his boss know and said nothing about the freebie spool. Never look a gift horse in the mouth, you know.

    Why in 2015 was Comcast just now wiring my house? It had been wired for cable years before, but a passing box truck ripped out the cable drop about 15 years ago. We had satellite for TV and DSL for internet and didn't care. So Comcast had to redo the drop when I dropped AT&T slow DSL. Once told about the truck ripping out the old wire, the new installer did a MUCH better job of stringing up a new drop from a higher place. So he also listened to me, did exactly what he needed to do to prevent another issue, and left me a spool of cable. Nice.

    I may be the only happy Comcast customer. Or I may be drunk. Pick.

    --
    Sig for hire.
  25. Not really cutting the cord by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I still need the cord for Internet. I just don't subscribe to TV channels anymore, not since every channel started permanently embedding .their logo on the screen all at the same time around 15-20 years ago, along with pop-up animated ads while the show was running. Distracting and unacceptable. Plus commercials are universally deceitful.

  26. more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Add this to figures yesterday for the number of American homes with fixed phone contracts and you can see that mobile services are rapidly destroying some old established business models..
    And it will.only get worse as com's improve their mobile coverage and services,if they did something about your pricey tariffs(compared to Europe) it would happen even quicker..

  27. Re:Comcast offered me $2 off per month to *add* ca by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $2/mo/person vs Poor Customer Service + Need Installer to Remove + Likelihood of Pressing Random Additional Charge (? item on bill)

    That $2 might not be worth the hassle.

  28. Re:Comcast offered me $2 off per month to *add* ca by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only that, the OP will have to pay monthly fees for STB rental. There may well be state, city taxes and other FCC fees that click in when TV is added to a service. That $2 reduction may well add $15 to the bill per month.

  29. Couldn't have happened to a nicer industry.... by RatPh!nk · · Score: 1

    Maybe they will wake up and serve up some a la carte channels.

    --
    Argh. The laws of science be a harsh mistress.
  30. Homeworx by speedlaw · · Score: 1

    All you need for OTA is a $40 Mediasonic box and a hard drive. VCR functions with one time $120 max. Of course, Tivo and a big hard drive is pretty good too, at a higher price point. I can't watch 'real time' TV either anymore, and that is all there was when I grew up. The kids ? The only time they watch "TV" is when a group wants to watch something together, and then there's a cable from the computer to the 'big screen'

  31. We are a recent cord cutter! by funkymonkjay · · Score: 1

    Went from $240 a month for triple play to about $120 for about the same service.
    Here's what I am using:
    1. OTA with Tablo (4 channel at a time recording) - 5tb hard drive. We record EVERYTHING! We get about 35 channels, crystal clear.
    2. Playstation Vue
    3. Dropped the phone line - wife doesn't miss the junk calls and kids are grown so no strong need for 911.

    We continue to have these services.
    1. Netflix
    2. Hulu plus
    3. Amazon prime

  32. Your Comcast business is not wanted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Comcast doesn't want our business.

    I got a letter from Comcast a few days ago offering TV and Internet for $89.95 which is twice what it's worth.

    BUT after calling them and inquiring I learned that that $90 deal would actually cost me $130 plus taxes each month.

    Before the phone call I was ready to sign up. After the phone call I said screw Comcast.

    I currently have Dish which doesn't allow me to watch TV when it's raining, snowing or windy outside. Where can I get cable TV and Internet for a reasonable price?

    1. Re:Your Comcast business is not wanted by mysidia · · Score: 1

      I currently have Dish which doesn't allow me to watch TV when it's raining, snowing or windy outside.

      This isn't an inherent problem. It is possible to receive a signal regardless of the rain, snow, or wind.

      The issue is likely the cheap antenna they have provided, and the lack of measures installed to protect it,
      stop the conductive service being modified by rain adhering to it, etc.

  33. Give me everything on-demand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For a decent price and I'll subscribe for life...
    I dont know a single person that still uses cable TV (other than parents and grand parents).

  34. Many providers ban your own modem in the USA. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sucks, but your political and social structure DEMANDS that government let businesses do their own thing, even if it's "Fuck over the customer", because the mythology of the USA is that no matter how bad private industry is, it's better than being in a commie country where the government "interferes" where someone doesn't want it.

  35. Re:Well, at least I can still use my compression t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I fail to see how those are mutually exclusive. In fact, most would argue the opposite, they just aren't in causal order.

  36. Re:Comcast offered me $2 off per month to *add* ca by torkus · · Score: 2

    It's $2 less* now.

    *Plus taxes and fees, surcharges, and the not-infrequent misbilling. Also, DVR service is included for 12 out of your 24 month contract and after 12 months bills at $29.95/month plus $19.95/month DVR rental fee. Be prepared to waste 8-12 hours trying to return the DVR and get a (working) normal cable box which will then break and require a service call with a 8AM-8PM window and 3 minute notice of arrival with $150 fee if an adult can't get to the door within 7 seconds of them ringing the bell.

    I've been tempted with similar a few times over the decade+ i've not bothered with cable tv...and it's never been worth the hassle.

    --
    You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
  37. Minimum commitment by tepples · · Score: 1

    you could rotate through them in succession and binge the shows of interest.

    Which I guess is part of the rationale behind the 12-month minimum for Prime.

    1. Re:Minimum commitment by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      Do they do that for the video-only membership, too? We mostly have it for the shipping and so on, although lately I've been becoming increasingly unenthusiastic about the competitiveness of their pricing on many things. I think they're beginning to switch to sinister phase II of operations, depending on my learned aversion to going to a physical store now that so many of the latter are gone.

  38. $750 for the TiVo box; Super Saver Shipping by tepples · · Score: 1

    CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox, PBS, CW, etc. are all free with this metal thing in the attic.

    Then you need to pay $750 for a TiVo DVR ($200 for the hardware and $550 for the required program guide subscription) or just accept that you'll miss any program aired when you happen not to be at home.

    Amazon Prime? Free since I already have it for deliveries

    "Super Saver Shipping" for large orders is also free, albeit with a minimum order of $35 and longer delivery time. People rationalize not paying extra for the upgrade from Super Saver Shipping to Prime because they consider faster delivery a luxury that can be dispensed with. Their time/money tradeoff is biased toward time.

    PLaystation Vue: $35 with auto DVR to the cloud!

    The FAQ implies that one person can have PlayStation Vue service only at two home addresses in his lifetime: "You can only make a home location change one time, otherwise your account may be blocked from service." Thus it might not be practical for people who move often following job opportunities.

    how well does that work for someone who doesn't already own a PlayStation 4 console on which to play PlayStation 4 games?

  39. Maybe Comcast won't mind, ultimately. by scradam · · Score: 1

    Is anyone concerned that if Ajit Pai (the FCC chair) and his financial backers get their way, the only distinguishing factor between broadcast TV and an internet package will be the IP protocol?

    I dread a ‘free/low cost Internet’ with the caveat that you can only visit ISP approved sources (like their own commercial ridden streaming platform and Facebook), and eventually, enough people will find it sufficient that the cost of equal access internet packages will become prohibitively priced. I’m concerned that Google, Apple, Facebook, MPAA, et al will even concede to this for the sake of controlling the narrative and keeping consumers away from what they judge as ‘fake news’ or ‘pirate sites’ (with true and legal but contrary perspectives and content conveniently lumped in with honestly fake or pirated info).

    1. Re:Maybe Comcast won't mind, ultimately. by mysidia · · Score: 1

      If you're worried about this eventuality, and I think we should be..... Imagine internet becoming a "Free" value-added service on your Cell phone, but it only includes Facebook, Wikipedia, and Verizon TV, or AT&T Video Streaming. If you want Netflix; it will be another $100 a month plus $10 per Gigabyte.
      Eventually, the policy means that Netflix fails as a business, so the option disappears completely.... as demand goes down, prices go up, so before you know it's $200 a month plus $100 per Gigabyte.

    2. Re:Maybe Comcast won't mind, ultimately. by mysidia · · Score: 1

      *COUGH* I forgot the point.... To avoid it, I think we need a more popular application just as popular as Facebook users will demand, which provide a Peer-to-Peer communications function similar to TCP, where encryption prevents the ISPs from examining traffic.

  40. We need some channels. by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 1

    Cable would be doing better if they offered channels that showed entertainment, news, sports, etc. instead of one-sided politics masquerading as entertainment, one-sided politics masquerading as news, one-sided politics masquerading as sports, etc. etc. etc.

    --
    Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
    1. Re:We need some channels. by guacamole · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you don't watch cable a lot. One-sided politics is mostly on CNN, Fox, and MSNBC. There is of course lots of entertainment, news, sports, and movies on the cable. In fact, the cord cutting options don't even come close to replace a full service TV package I receive from Uverse about 120 a month.

      There is always someone in my household who likes politics. So we gotta have CNN. Fox, BBC, MSNBC, OneAmerica, etc. There is always someone who likes movies and shows, so we gotta have AMC, FX, HBO, Cinemax, at very least. There are people who enjoy soccer, NBA, winter sports, and Formula 1. So we gotta have pretty much every sports channel. There are people who like travel, nature, pet, and cooking shows, so we gotta have all those special interest channels too. So in the end having a full menu of channels for 120bucks isn't so bad. And you can still stream it all, or pre-record on DVR.

  41. Confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I go to my Comcast program-listing menu, it is a matrix with an x-axis and a y-axis. For some reason when I select something further along the x-axis it won't let me watch it until later. They must have some kind of bug.

  42. Rofl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn how many of you are payed netflix shills lol?
    Want shows, films ... damn open up play store or itunes on your fucking device and rent or buy away...
    Damn fucking shills lol...

  43. Rising Prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They will get $100 / month out of you one way or another. Keep an eye on the rising Internet bill.

  44. Re:Comcast offered me $2 off per month to *add* ca by JohnFen · · Score: 1

    I've been saving somewhere around $15/mo by getting the internet+TV bundle vs just internet from Comcast for years now.

  45. Re:Well, at least I can still use my compression t by kriston · · Score: 1

    It surprises me they use RG-6 when RG-56 was typical the last time I looked (but that was a few years ago). No doubt it's copper-clad steel and not pure copper. Pure copper is expensive stuff. I know because I have a spool of it.

    --

    Kriston