Slashdot Mirror
Cable Industry Finally Fights Cord Cutting With Fewer Ads (dslreports.com)
The cable industry is slowly realizing that more advertisements and higher prices aren't the solution to cord cutting. Karl Bode writes via DSLReports: AT&T and Dish have explored offering cheaper, more flexible streaming alternatives (DirecTV Now and Sling TV, respectively), both understanding that getting out ahead of the cord cutting trend is the right play, even if the net result is making less money from traditional television. And on the broadcasting front, several companies this month made it clear they'll be reducing the ad loads on their programming, since charging users a subscription fee and socking them with endless ads is becoming a dated concept in the cord cutting era. Fox, for example, told the Wall Street Journal this week that the company would be reducing TV ad time in its content to two minutes an hour by 2020. Comcast NBC Universal says it's also following suit, having cut advertising time in its own shows by 10%, and reduced the overall number of advertising during commercial breaks by 20%. Given there's 83 million households still subscribing to traditional cable TV, many cable executives are under the false impression they can keep doubling down on bad ideas without the check coming due. But the data indicates this head in the sand approach simply isn't sustainable. Pay TV providers saw a reduction of more than 500,000 traditional pay TV customers during the fourth quarter, a decline of 3.4% total pay TV customers from the year before. That 3.4% decline was up from the 2% rate during in the fourth quarter of 2016 and a 1% rate of decline one year before that.
I made the decision this week to cut the cord myself and I dropped all my TV equipment today.
In an industry where high price/low value is cited by 80% of the people dropping their TV service, I was told that I had to pay an extra $60 a month to get a "free" internet speed upgrade to switch from a grandfathered TWC plan to a new spectrum plan with no other benefits. $145->$205.
Instead I opted to drop tv, drop my bill to $65, and get the "still techncially supposed to be free" bump from 60x5 to 100x10.
I just don't know how they think people wil pay $140 for Cable TV when there are so many solid alternatives that are under $40 if not under $30 a month (Sling, Hulu, Netflix, Etc).
AT&T and Comcast can just fuck right off. Lower your goddamn prices and improve customer service and then maybe we can talk. And please stop trying to contact me. When I want to talk to you, I'll let you know.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Only reason for tv is if you like live sports and that's cause the leagues have backwards streaming options.
I want a 30 channel subscription that allows me to select all 30 stations from a lineup on a 30 day interval. A menu that allows me to checkbox what stations I want and then change them on a monthly basis. You pay a minimum for just basic connectivity, and then a tiered level that allows you to choose the stations YOU want, not some carefully constructed pack that is calculated to spread the popular channels through out 5 packs which in the end costs you the same or more as you would spend on a traditional tiered system. I want the program to be streamed to me at high speed so I can fast forward and reverse even if it is not on my DVR. I want enough memory in my set top box to store 30 minutes of HD video. I would even stomach a few ads, the more targeted the better, I hate watching ads for diapers or baby food, or feminine products. I hate watching an ad for the show I am currently watching...*cough* El Rey Network. I love hockey but what is the point of the NHL network in the offseason, or for that matter what is the point of OWN period ?
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
They took too long to adapt and fight the new guys on the block, now they came in last place.
All I wanted was maybe 5 channels, everything I couldn't care less about, yet they still charge me that "basic package" of channels I give zero shit about and have to pay extra for 10 channels when I only want 5... Sorry but it's way too expensive for the 5 channels I wanted.
The entire advertising industry and everyone who depends on them have shown themselves to be unethical , and morally bankrupt. They ALL deseeve to die in a nuclear accident.
Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
I recall buying cable TV because it had NO ADs.
Now we get to pay to see ads.
They're cutting their own throats and I have no sympathy for cable companies.
Fox, for example, told the Wall Street Journal this week that the company would be reducing TV ad time in its content to two minutes an hour by 2020.
JFC. I mean JFC.
Did I mention JFC?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Sorry, I can watch what I want, when I want. something you can't do on cable unless you have a DVR which is just another piece of unnecessary equipment that will have a limited life span and need to be replaced.
Unless CommieCast can get their act together and let me watch any and every episode of Family Guy, Breaking Bad or anything else anytime I want and for only $10-20/month they'll never have me back.
I have a driverless car for rent!
(32,000 people show up)
"It can't carry them all. What a failure!"
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
I stopped watching in 2013 because the ads are just too in my face. I started playing a game of, flick the ad off before the message so that I got the art work but not the message until I realised the shows kind of sucked as well.
The shows that didn't suck I didn't watch because of the ads and waited until they were re-runs that I could binge watch without commercials.
I think it has had a positive impact on my mental health as well, I feel a lot less stressed since I stopped watching all that crap.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
The cable model is obsolete. The idea that you have to wait until a specific time to watch a specific program is the result of technological limitations, not because it is better. Now, that limitation no longer exists, and the cable model can only be sustained so long as big business uses its influence to keep an inferior system around, to the customer's detriment. If they don't adapt to changing technology, other services and pirates will.
"Split-screen" advertisement, where a silent add takes up the top quarter of your TV screen for 15 seconds at a time, will play at the end of every scene shift. The first partner for the program is McDonals, and will be rolled out during the next season of The Walking Dead.
Let me try to reconcile these comments: hambone142 probably remembers buying cable TV in the 1970s when it had only the locals, public access, and "subscription services such as HBO", before there were "cable, but not subscription, channels such as CNN". Are cable TV operators still allowed to require subscribers to buy a package of "cable, but not subscription, channels such as CNN" before allowing them to buy "subscription services such as HBO"?
They're only about 10 years too late. They really need to slow down with this extremely reckless rate of change.
Fewer ads just isn't going far enough.
It has to be fewer ad + true a la carte + lower prices + no rental fees for boxes + better customer service + no package requirements for anything, and I mean ANYTHING + access to the service through an app and not a decade out of date box.
Fewer ads is a good start, I'd argue for getting rid of cable boxes entirely and better customer service is always good.
But a la carte wouldn't actually save you money, really. Not in most cases.
Because they know roughly what the viewerships are. Get channels individually? They ramp up the prices per channel. You end up paying as much as you did for the buffet for just the channels you watch, can't watch something special/unusual on a station you don't normally get (what if your parents come over?), as well as an amount for the systems needed to be that specific.
Most of the channels you get with the basic package are basically free for the cable company to offer because the channel is ad supported.
I don't read AC A human right
If they would just cull the " Ask your Doctor if $stupidly_expensive_drug is right for you " ads, it would cut the total ad times by at least HALF.
No one wants to see that sh*t. I personally make it a point to refuse any medication that constantly begs me to use it.
Last time I watched The Big Bang Theory on broadcast television, it seemed as if there were more minutes of commercials and promos than actual content. I've often turned off a show when the fourth of several commercials in a row starts to air, or when I see the start of what I've learned is a two minute commercial (Have you seen the BowFlex commercial?).
There once was a time when broadcasters tried hard to get you to watch a show. Now it's devolved into a game to see whether they can keep you from turning it off.
Back in the day when everyone had land lines, once upon a time you actually had to RENT a telephone from the phone company. So you paid for not only the line but the phone too. Just like the cable box. Then someone came up with the bright idea of selling you a phone instead of renting one every month. They tried to challenge it in court and lost.
Cable industry is going the way of the Dodo bird. Technology is obsolete. Service stinks. Content for the most part sucks. They have lost me as a customer and I'm never going back.
I cut the cord because:
1. Service is too expensive. (I also enjoyed it when they keep raising the price for the cable box rentals because they claim it's too expensive to maintain their equipment.)
2. Less interest in the programming (Gee, I cannot wait for the next heavily-scripted "reality" TV show.)
3. Horrible customer service
4. No longer willing to pay for everyone's ESPN (I don't watch it, so why am I paying for it?)
5. I stopped going to see most movies because they suck, why would I want to pay to see it at home?
6. When I wanted to watch something (usually late at night) most of the programming seems to be nothing more than infomercials.
7. Too many damn commercials.
8. The only broadcasts I watch regularly are the local AM news and I can get that for free. Besides, all I care about is the traffic and weather.
I cut the cord years ago and have saved thousands of dollars.
I don't remember whether it was ads or show quality, but I quit TV decades ago, and now I have no desire to go back.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Too little, too late. I cut the cord almost 10 years ago. When we signed up for cable, the "basic" package started at a reasonable $35 per month. Then, before you know it, it's $60 a month, and I really couldn't tell you what that extra $25 was giving me, and damned if I needed to spend $720 a year on the dreck the TV people presented as "entertainment." Now, when I stay in hotels, I'll flip through the channels and quickly realize I'm still not missing anything. About the only channel I actually like is Cartoon Network. Sure, when the guys at work start talking about Silicon Valley, or GoT, I'm outside the loop. But I can live with that.
The problem is they got into the situation where no solution is a short-term win for the cable companies. The unfortunate truth is that top executives are all about the short term. Their pay packages are all about year over year growth, and winning back customer loyalty is going to cost in the short term. The executives, with this latest charade, are trying to minimize the year-over-year hit by slowly reducing commercial content. Fox is reducing commercial time to 2 minutes per hour, but not until 2020. Of course, they are announcing it today, though. They want the benefit of goodwill generated by reducing commercial time without actually taking the hit for doing it now. They are treating customers like they are stupid, and this isn't 1980 any more.
Boards and shareholders should be stringing the cable execs up by their gonads, because they are the ones who are selling out the companies they work for. Everything they have done for the last 15 years has been to maximize short term profit at the expense of long term customer good will.
If they want to dig themselves out they need to change, with immediate effect, all top executive compensation packages to either reflect profit gains over a five year period, or better yet, base them not on profit but on a formula that combines profit and subscriber numbers.
I really don't mind the ads at all....it is the obnoxious high price for in the end not much content worthwhile to watch. I looked into cable cutting, I'd save a few bucks per month, but had to switch between OTA, Chromecast, and PC to change to the various channels juggling two remotes and a tablet. Sadly, there is not a single media center application out there that is affordable and does not need a masters in CS to get set up. Best so far was Windows Media Center....no idea why Microsoft dropped that from Windows.
I'll come back when I can have a la carte subscriptions to quality content without ads.
I remember when cable first came to our small town. We lived in the middle of no where, and we could get 2 TV stations with an outdoor antenna. So, when we were finally able to get 50+ stations for a small monthly fee, we were happy to take it, commercials and all. Back then we were paying for the delivery. These days we are paying for the content. So, I don't have to pay twice for television anymore. I will either get it for no cost and "pay" by having to watch commercials, or I will pay a cash fee and get it commercial free. Given the choice of both, I will take the commercial free option every time. That is why I pay the $11.99 commercial free option for Hulu. I'm will not allow content providers to double dip any longer.
There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.
So now I will only be subjected to ear piercing commercials for only 2 minutes out of every hour instead of 30? Wow, where do I sign up. I am looking forward to hearing aids!
This may have been a great move ten years ago, but it is too reactionary and too belated. You won't see me shed any tears for the cable industry.
I think the cable companies are looking at the very possibility that Americans are switching to an "on demand" model of television viewing. And I think the biggest cable company of all, Comcast, realizes this. Their phased national rollout of DOCSIS 3.1 gigabit Internet service is eventually designed for things like on-demand viewing of ATSC 3.0 Ultra HD content, given that ATSC 3.0 includes a full specification for streaming video.
In Southern Calif I vaguely remember the introduction of cable TV in the late 60's or 1970's.
The big selling point was: Unlike broadcast TV: No commercials! Because they got their funding from subscriber's monthly fees.
Cut the cord a year ago and I'm enjoying all of the shows I want to watch via Hulu and Netflix. So, yes, advertisements are a problem, a small problem. The real issue is that the programming from ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX is absolute intolerable garbage. In short, I cut the cord, I choose what I want to watch and when.
I found that I watched the comedy channel South Park episodes over and over, that is when I had this epiphany. If the best thing to watch on TV is SouthPark, why keep cable.
That is roughly $1400 I have saved over the past year.
We have kept our cable because our TiVo allows us to automatically jump the ads just like the sat service systems. It only takes 35-40 minutes to watch an hour show. 18-22 minutes for a "half hour" show. And we have a lot of content that is automatically recorded.
The funny thing that we noticed is that for the old 60's era shows that are on the nostalgia channels, they run 50 minutes of content and 10 minutes of commercials per hour.
...would refuse to see the obvious solution: lower prices, no ads and "a la carte" channel by channel choices.
BINGO! You may have your business back now!