For all the talk about cord-cutting in the digital era, movement in that direction is relatively slow, as many viewers switch from cable to satellite or telepone providers rather than drop multichannel service altogether. Nielsen reports that 98% of viewing remained on traditional TV in Q4 2011. Cable lost more than 2.9 million subscribers as viewers switched to telephone or satellite providers. U.S. homes subscribing to cable, satellite or telephone providers for their TV service declined 1.5% or about 1.5 million last year, according to figures Nielsen released this week. Subscribers adding telco (about 1.9 million) or satellite service (roughly 280K) weren’t enough to make up the difference.
Additionally, households with broadband and only free, over-the-air broadcast TV increased by 631K over the last year, climbing 14% to 5.1 million. Broadcast-only homes dropped 1%, to about 11 million households versus 11.15 million a year earlier, according to Nielsen’s Cross-Platform Report for the fourth quarter of 2011. Americans still watch a lot of TV. The average viewer watched 46 minutes less TV in the fourth quarter, an overall drop of 0.5%. Most of that shift is attributed to DVR use, which was up 12,3%, Nielsen says, but viewing of internet video, which is up 4.2%, is beginning to have an impact. Video game consoles have become a significant factor. More than 45% of US homes have consoles that can also be used to watch movies or internet video. Average time users spend on game consoles was up 30% in Q4 over the same period in 2010.


Doesn’t help when cable’s in the habit of constantly raising their rates. Being in effect forced to take packages with channels you don’t even watch doesn’t exactly endear the cable company to me. And,of course the greedy bastards won’t budge on offering channels a la carte.
You knucklehead cordcutters should get used to a life without any amenities–including plane flights.
EVERYTHING is going to rise in price signficantly. Airline tickets, amusement parks, not just cable bills.
Instead of figuring out how to save 50 bucks a month, you should figure out how you can be more valuable and earn more money so small amounts of money don’t bug you so much.
Cordcutter = loser with no ambition
Too late, I already fly Southwest, lol. And who’s the bigger “loser,” the wage slave who scrambles all his live to enrich shareholders, or a person who learns to shop wisely and find cheaper alternatives to the same services, or just be happy without those services at all? Amazingly enough, it’s possible to live without cable TV or Disneyland. It won’t kill you.
Sounds like a true disgruntled cable executive who can’t face the truth…
I am one of those that cancelled cable and watch everything online. It wasn’t a budget reason, I just no longer found paying more than $150 a month for programming i rarely watched to be worth while. I would subscribe again if they were to truly offer channels a la carte.
Someone should start a business offering cable or dish packages without sports, which more than anything else, is driving up costs. The number of single-person households is growing all the time, and when you’re only talking about pleasing the tastes of one person, odds are greater that their tastes will not include sports.
I cut the cord two years ago and until they offer channels a la cart I won’t be coming back. I’m patient enough to wait for the dvd/netflix releases of my favorite shows.
For me it’s kinda hard to be angry at the cable companies when they are forced to package certain channels. Disney is the worst at this with ESPN.
U got that right, Disney is getting up to $9 per month, per subscriber for just its ESPN branded networks, wonder what their Monthly GRAND Totals are for all their ABC/Disney/ESPN channels. I think the FCC should make the Cable/Satellite companies pubish what these fees are per channel…check out this article from deadline where FOX is going to get into the Cable sports business. http://www.deadline.com/2012/03/news-corp-planning-24-hour-sports-network-to-rival-espn-bloomberg/#more-250105
FOX already gets $1 a per month, per subscriber for just FOX News.
Where is the ala carte service that was on the way. Let viewers decide what channels the want. Seems so simple of an idea.
a la carte will NEVER happen, their EXCUSE is that quite of few newer (lower rated) “start-up” networks would never make it if they offered a la carte. Because cable companies claim that when these nets launch, they put them on the cable line-up for free for x amount time. note: i believe a read the Oprah’s OWN is currently one of those freebe nets and is looking to get $0.25 per mth/sub by 2013.
Why not line-up those free-be nets w/Local channels as the basic tier with a flat rate that we must pay. then add-on the a la carte Nets that we want per channel? Then as each “start-up/freebe” gets noticed w/viewers and start charging fees, they are moved to a la carte tier.
Those networks shouldn’t exist on cable/satellite then – they should be online/streaming only until they get big enough. No need to subsidize the small stuff any longer in the world of infinite stations…
That day is coming, definitely. We’re in a transitional period now.
Right now there is a free-for-all on the internet where network sites and Hulu provide access to pay TV content for free only a day or two after airing (and with a reduced commercial load). This itself encourages users to cut the cord. Requiring authentication is the only way to go, as well as aggressively lobbying for cutting down on the piracy sites.
Perhaps if the product were sold in a straight forward manner piracy sites wouldn’t be so necessary. Its not enough that they want you to buy the product that you want, they want you to pay for the product you don’t want. Even when you purchase the product that you do choose they want you to buy it 4 different times for each possible device you may choose to watch it on. Piracy is a result of an overbearingly greedy industry. Authentication is a waste of time. Hulu only offers whats broadcast for free anyways, so the networks don’t have much of much of a cause to cry considering they are selling advertisement for the same product more than once.
No, piracy is a result of dishonest scum doing illegal things. Of course the pirates always have whiny excuses (“I wouldn’t doooo it if cable didn’t cost soooo much!”) but that doesn’t make it right. Hey, I’d love to own a nice car, and I can’t afford one. Maybe I should go out and steal one because buying it is so expensive. Or, novel idea, if I can’t afford something, I live with the situation instead of becoming a scummy little thief.
Lock up the pirates and throw away the key, I say.
Yeah, putting people in jail is a real bargain. derp.
With cable you’re paying for alot of channels you don’t watch. There are maybe 20 channels I never stop at, a QVC type channel, 2 spanish channels, ESPN. Might watch a Frasier rerun on Lifetime but don’t watch anything else there. MTV sometimes shows videos but not regularly so I don’t click on that often.
So, yeah… not alot of reasons for most people to pay for cable anymore. It was special years ago.
i cut the cord a few years ago. i pay for hulu plus (via a wdtv live box) and watch anything else on the internet. if a particular show isnt on hulu plus or on the internet (legally), I MOVE ON WITH MY LIFE. i could give a shit about tv. while it can be entertaining, it’s ultimately trivial. and no one talks about tv shows at work anymore because everyone watches different stuff.
Yup. I used to have cable just to keep up with the conversations but now since most people talk about Storage Wars so that kind of garbage I’d rather quietly drink coffee at my desk.
Some day maybe the cables will just deliver Internet access.
The American household deserves a break. Since the divestiture of the phone company – although there are some positive aspects to this – things that used to be free or cost next to nothing are an outrageous premium now for a content distribution cabal. Add on a home phone – I’m of the opinion that these computer phone lines are very problematic – power outage during a disaster won’t add up to a communications revolution but perhaps some needless accidents or deaths that could be avoided with traditional phone service – plus cell phones for your family – all of which were out during 9/11 as well as the huge grid East Coast power outage a few years back – and you’re paying well over a couple hundred bucks a month. That’s all good monthly money that could go toward your children’s college tuition or a retirement fund or a nice insurance policy because you have 50 music channels that you never ever watch, in fact you forget they’re even there.
How could the phone service be out during 9/11 when so many people made calls on their cell phones from the twin towers and the plane to their loved ones?
It wasn’t out completely – some people were getting through – but it was extremely difficult to get a call through on either cell or landlines from NYC on 9/11. I admit, I’ve never blamed the companies for that, though. I considered it an inevitable result of most of the people in the Western world attempting to call one another all at the same time.
I stated something incorrectly. My appended recollection was that there was cell phone service – depending on your carrier – during the grid outage but that it was difficult to get a signal because the systems were so overloaded which went on for at least a couple of days.
It would’ve been easier to just unscrew the cord.
But cutting it is sooooo much more satisfying. Preferably with a machete, or one of those badass samurai swords if you can get your hands on one.
“Requiring authentication is the only way to go, as well as aggressively lobbying for cutting down on the piracy sites”
I know honey (she says soothingly), if it was not for that nasty, nasty internet folks would just would magically find the $120 a month they need to watch the 3 or 4 shows they can always get on DVD later. If the internet did not exist cable subscriptions would still be dropping. Look at historical data. Trying to sell nonessentialal things in an ongoingng recession is a challenge. One the cable companies are not up to.
Unscrewing is right, considering the screwing we’ve been getting from cable.
i cut my cable 8 yrs back. No regrets,saved money, no more brainwashing and have more time for family.plus watch stuff online if needed. I suggest everyone does it too.
Well with QVC, they pay the cable companies to put them on as opposed to charging them per subscriber.
I dumped my HBO over a year ago to protest Bill Maher, I’m sill paying over $140 a month WITHOUT HBO. No way am I taking HBO back, I don’t miss it and I don’t want to pay more.
So let me get this straight: you dumped HBO to protest Bill Maher, yet are still paying over $140 a month…WITHOUT HBO.
Meanwhile, Maher donates $1,000,000 to Obama’s SuperPAC.
Guess you showed him.
I guess you know what they say about a fool (or in Maher’s case, “rodent”) and his money.
And then, because of that, Maher got a two-year renewal. Some protest that was, and effective too…:P
Sometimes, it’s just about principles.
I guess I was the only one who noticed the drop in cable subscribers is insignificant. It’s a bucket or two of water out of the Atlantic. Also if you watch-baseball, soccer, basketball and hockey you’re paying each leagues fee per season to watch. Add all four up and its a ridiculous high number way more than if you just paid cable. No one seems to have the answer for people like me, huge sports fans. Only the NFL offers free programming but after that you are out of luck. Also there is some serious issues with how tech savvy is the customer. If you have a tech issue can you fix it? Know really can you? I see people freaking out on something basic wih their smart phone I can’t see that same person figuring out why the signal becomes weak (and now it’s a computer/web issue not a tv issue, there’s no “box” to reset). I’m not saying cutting the cord isn’t an option but no one I know personally has done it. At this point I need more solutions before I hop on the bandwagon.
I wonder how many people have done what my wife and I have done – cut cable and use only OTA broadcast. If you live in an urban area and have a newer tv, the picture is incredible and we still get 20-30 channels, all of which have actual content on them to some extent or another. As a sportsfan, it is tough on me, but I’ve discovered it’s much more fun to watch fewer sporting events in a big group of people (at a bar or a friend who has cable) than to veg out on the tv and watch more at home. I’d pay full market for ESPN networks, AMC, Fox Sports, and NBC Sports but $120 a month just to watch 5 or 6 channels is insane
100% agree
another fun fact about all of this is the fact that the digital over the air signal is full uncompressed beautiful 720p/1080i, as opposed to cable which has a signal that is SO compressed that its hard to watch – ESPECIALLY on a newer tv.
directv same comprlession thing (to a lesser degree). uverse/fios dont seem to have it.
Time Warner has a huge bill to pay for the operation of the losing CNN, and multimillionaire salaries like Anderson Cooper. Add to this their mega combo residential/retail plaza at Columbus Circle in Manhattan. Little wonder they keep raising their rates. I gave up cable years ago and don’t miss it a lick.
@Bamaman, I agree about the picture quality with over the air & the newer tv’s. The pictures are absolutely beautiful. Ever since the switchover to dtv,the picture quality is truly astounding. Personally, if someone chooses to have cable-that’s their right. I personally don’t feel like contributing my money to these cable companies. It’s truly absurd being charged $120 monthly when you truly only watch only a small fraction of the channels. It’s just not worth it. Also,heaven forbid you have a problem with your service,because,they will fix it at THEIR convenience-not yours. I agree 100% with scifi_fan-it is possible to live without cable-live well in fact! I don’t know about others,but,most of us are not made of money &(to me anyway) spending $120 monthly isn’t something I’m willing to do anymore. To me cable is not a necessity. I tend to view monthly power bills,food,shelter as being higher priorities over cable tv. To those people who have cable-that’s their right. I have just made a choice that for me personally-cable is just not worth it. Thank you.
I cut the cord in 2008 and I don’t miss it a bit. I use OTA in HD, DVDs, and streaming video and I have plenty to watch. I’ll never go back to pay TV. I tired of the high priced crappy programming that they are selling.
A LOT of people I have talked to are sitting on the fence deciding whether or not to discontinue their subscription to a Pay-TV Provider. I cancelled my subscription five years ago, and I haven’t looked back. The Pay-TV Industry is beginning to reap what they have sowed. Year after year they continually raise their prices, and at the same time they’ve done noting but LOWER the quality of what they are showing. In the last 15 years the number of commercials shown during each hour has more than DOUBLED. At the same time, the quality of the programming also has headed south. Many “Niche” channels have abandoned their format, there are times you can see the same episode of the same show 12 times or more on just as many channels. “Reality” Shows have spread across the landscaping like some malignancy from Hades. Listen folks, A House divided against itself CANNOT STAND! When a Company adopts the model of raising prices and lowering quality, their customers end up either:
1. Seeking that product from another source
2. Replacing that product with something else.
In my 52 years of existence I’ve seen LEGIONS of businesses, large and small, adopt this model, and soon after they were out of business. The TV Industry is now on this path of death. If they don’t turn away from it, they will fall!