Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

There Will Be 22 Million Cord Cutters By 2018, Says Report (dslreports.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the weak-ties dept.

A new report by eMarketer predicts that 22.2 million U.S. adults will have cut the cord on cable, satellite or telco TV service by the end of 2017, which is up 33% over 2016. It also notes that ad investment will expand just 0.5% to $71.65 billion this year, down from the $72.72 billion predicted in the company's original first quarter forecast for 2017. From a report via DSLReports: This year, there will be 22.2 million cord-cutters ages 18 and older, a figure up 33.2% over 2016. That's notably higher than the 15.4 million eMarketer previously estimated. The total number of U.S. adult cord-nevers (users that have never signed up for a traditional cable TV connection) will grow 5.8% this year to 34.4 million. Note that eMarketer's numbers don't include streaming options from the likes of Dish (Sling TV) or AT&T (DirecTV Now), though so far gains in subscribers for these services haven't offset the decline in traditional cable TV subscribers anyway.

8 of 113 comments (clear)

  1. TFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Cord-cutters? Cord-nevers? Are we running out of labels to identify humans?

    1. Re:TFA... by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It certainly fits into the narrative I'd want to sell if I was a cable company. Cord cutters almost implies some sort of deviant behaviour where people are moving outside the bounds of normal, polite society. Don't be a 'cord cutter' - they are anarchists and communists.

      (I know that's a bit hyperbolic, but it just seems strange to me that there is a label that defines people who don't pay for something - at best its just feels old fashioned. If I only shop online am I also a 'store smasher'? What's the label for people who don't pay for Netflix, etc? Stream poo-pooer?)

  2. Re:Comcast has fake subscribers by SeaFox · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Note that the AC signed up for a bundle of Internet and BASIC cable. The cord cutters that are reaping huge savings are the ones who were paying for a buttload of channel tiers and renting 3-4 cable boxes, at least one being a more expensive DVR so they could time-shift programming, etc. These expenses go way down when you only have the subscribe to a couple streaming services to have "all the content" and your streaming device is a one-time purchase.

  3. snip the cord by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have yet to find a cord cutting option that is worth anything. Yes I can steal all kinds of programming with KODI, but legal options are more expensive than cable. Everyone starting a streaming servers and wants $10-20/month for some nitch set of programs. THat meets cable prices pretty quick.

  4. Re:I wouldn't be so sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't agree at all. You can start and stop streaming services as needed. I wanted to watch a few shows on Hulu so I get it for a couple of months and then put it on hold. Same with Netflix. Same with HBO. I like baseball so I get the MLB.tv subscription and watch all I want. Fortunately I don't care about the local team anyway so I don't need cable. Playoffs I can watch at a local sports bar if I care enough or over the air if it's on a local channel.

    Cable or satellite? Yeah you get a lot of garbage channels, although you're mostly paying for a few high flyers like ESPN. Which brings up the next point - ESPN has turned so disgustingly political and argumentative it's not worth watching anyway - who needs Faux News on a sports channel or some dumb bitch telling me about white supremacy. So unless you're desperate to watch some sporting event you'll need it, but in my case I can avoid them altogether (plus they are Disney, and I give zero dollars to Disney on principle.)

    Streaming has saved me a ton of money and I don't have to purchase cable "news" and all the garbage shopping channels I don't watch.

  5. Re:I wouldn't be so sure by the+coose · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You are probably right. I "cut the cord" over year ago and knocked my monthly entertainment bill down to $70 from $150. It was a tough at first. I've been a cable subscriber for over 20 years, always automatically subscribing to the service every time I moved without even thinking about the money. Once I considered the cost to the number of channels I actually watched ratio, it just didn't make any financial sense. So I decided to try cord cutting (a misnomer really). I also installed an antenna outdoors to get the local channels. I did miss a few channels at first, but it didn't take long to ween myself off. If I can't watch a particular show or can't get a particular channel, then it's not the that big of a deal. The media company just won't have me as a source of advertising dollars. Their loss, not mine.

    And if what you say comes true with streaming services, then so be it. I'll just find other things to do. The big thing for me has been certain sports but I even found that I can live without that and just check the score and watch the highlights from a website. You ask why bother cutting cable; I ask why bother getting it in the first place.

  6. This is absurd: Almost no one is cutting the cord. by CrankyOldEngineer · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Most are just receiving different services on the cable. Streaming instead of traditional TV channels. Cord-cutting is going without a cable, fiber, DSL, or satellite connection altogether.

    --
    COE
  7. There is one more alternative by johannesg · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Which is not to watch TV to begin with. There are plenty of things you can do in all that time you now spend in front of a TV: having fun with friends and family, reading books, gardening, sports, enjoying sunsets, playing computer games, and many, many more.