

The trickle of canceled cable TV subscribers last year has turned into a stream - selamattidur
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TEC_CUTTING_CABLE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

======
evilduck
My household just cancelled our basic satellite service last week because of
AppleTV+iTunes+Netflix.

Our reasoning was this: Netflix lets us have the "background noise" programs
that we don't really care about for $8/mo and it has a big enough catalog that
it's worth it. We can purchase everything else from iTunes and at our rate of
"new show consumption", the $60/mo is better spent being put towards iTunes
purchases where it's ad-free, on demand, and able to be moved to devices. For
TV shows, that's about 15-20 episodes a month _purchased_ without affecting
our previous budget. In practice, we don't watch half that many new shows so
we'll be saving around $30/month and building a catalog of content that we
semi-own where the value increases the longer we use it. Cable/Sat services
don't build on themselves like that. Plus, the AppleTV runs at 6 watts where
the satellite receiver ran at 10x that, we might even see a lower electric
bill.

Households that live for watching TV aren't going to be swayed that easily,
but they're easily spending twice as much too.

~~~
BigZaphod
We did this over 2 years ago. Our 2.5yo son is (so far) growing up with very
little exposure to television commercials (he almost never sees them unless we
are watching something on Hulu), and we consider that a good thing. Not only
that, since it's all on-demand, he can choose whatever fits his mood during
the time he's allowed to watch stuff. And because the media is "always
available", I think he's developing a kind of acceptance that it's okay to
stop watching when he's bored because the content availability is not
constrained to "now." In other words, it's far easier for him to leave a show
midway when it's time for bed or something because he knows he can just pick
it up later and continue some other day. This is a decidedly different
experience than growing up with scheduled TV pre-DVR where every minute was
precious and missing anything was a "big deal."

~~~
evilduck
Our 7 month old son also played a part in the decision. I'd rather him develop
a habit of filling the majority of his idle time with less mentally and
physically passive activities than television. Not that he can't ever watch
TV, but I hope that we can find something else more entertaining together.

------
Udo

      The weak economy is hitting Americans where they spend a lot of their free time: at the TV set.
    

While the economy might be the trigger that drives people over the edge to
unsubscribe, I actually believe that a large number of them was
disenfranchised with TV programming before that. When it comes to
entertainment, we have exactly three categories: reality TV, sports events,
and series that are designed to be huge blockbusters.

Personally, my biggest beef with this is the series part (I don't watch
reality TV or sports at all), because we're only ever seeing the most dumbed-
down shit that is designed from the ground up for marketability. Only rarely
does that procedure produce a great show, and when it does, it's by pure
accident. As a result, we get fiction programming where Warehouse 13 is
considered "edgy sci-fi TV", when it fact it is neither edgy nor scifi at all.

~~~
onemoreact
I could not agree more. I have a FIOS and a huge HDTV, in the living room and
I end up watching one TV show reguarlly and a few movies. The last time I
spent a significant amount of time in front of the TV was the Olympics whose
coverage was so bad I ended up fast forwarding though most of it. The only
advantage of cable is they live HDTV programming is less compressed than most
streaming options. Yet, for some reason even their Video on Demand option is
more compressed than live tv even though they have a full fiber network.

As to programming, I used to watch a fair amount of edutainment like NOVA but
even that has been dumbed down to meaningless drivel. I can still get into a
good nature show in HDTV, but mostly they are just Steve Erwin style psudo
reality TV designed to maximize the number of teeth shown per minute.

PS: If you have not seen it "How It’s Made" is still fairly interesting.

~~~
pasbesoin
As for the Olympics, on my basic cable television service (held due to Comcast
pricing issues), the one stream of broadcasting that was not utter crap was
one of the secondaries that was on... CNBC or something like that. They showed
particularly women's curling in pretty much complete broadcasts, except for
commercials.

I'm neither a sports fan nor a curling aficionado (or, I wasn't), but I quite
enjoyed watching those games and following the Canadian women's team on their
way to victory.

People are bailing on cable television (and new television in general) because
the programming is utter crap. And then the companies sit on the good, if
older, stuff and move it ever further up in the premium levels. I'd actually
watch "Star Trek: The Next Generation", but it's been moved to price levels I
won't pay for. The channel perennially re-running "West Wing" was recently
bumped from my service (despite Comcast's supposed agreement to hold the
status quo until 2013).

Now, "The Next Generation" is on Netflix. So, screw you, cable TV.

(Just wish I had a better choice for my Internet connectivity.)

------
rglover
If cable networks and MSOs were smart, they'd start developing their own
"Netflix" style operation. Build MSO-specific web apps that make it easy to do
two things: 1.) Watch live network streams as if I had a box hooked up to my
TV and 2.) Give users access to a VOD library (just like Netflix) for each
network. There are PLENTY of downsides but unfortunately, these companies need
to realize that the old model doesn't work and is only going to continue to
die off. Want to keep your subscribers? Move to the web. Now. Worry about the
details later.

~~~
iamdave
_these companies need to realize that the old model doesn't work_

You give them entirely too much credit, the cable tv industry is joined at the
hip to news networks and inextricably to movie producers for broadcast rights.

And what do we know about the news industry and the movie industry? Both are
in a state of flux because instead of chasing down a new method of
distribution, they held on to increasingly irrelevant business models and now
they're paying for it.

<CAVEAT EMPTOR>If Time Warner suddenly comes out with a portable VOD program,
instead of locking me down to my living room - and produces one that actually
compels me to keep using it, and doesn't expect me to have both home service
and VOD as an extra premium, I will _gladly_ eat my words. As it stands, I
doubt that will happen, and I doubt it will happen in a cost effective way.

It's a beautiful idea, honestly. If they made a VOD service where you paid one
flat fee that isn't a ridiculous cost for online video, I'd reckon the demand
would easily make up the difference in costs leasing/selling boxes. </CAVEAT
EMPTOR>

edit for clarity: With the news this is more talking to print news.

~~~
rglover
You make a good point about the interconnectivity of the news/film industries
to broadcasting, but we've reached a point where people are going to need to
let go and embrace what's next. The fear is that of uncertainty and the
behavior of consumers but in all actuality, people love television and they'll
still pay to watch it. If they have to lower costs, so be it. The upside?
You'll probably reach and RETAIN more customers because of the lower costs.

~~~
iamdave
_we've reached a point where people are going to need to let go and embrace
what's next_

I agree.

But what we'll see if it happens, in my opinion will be an amalgamation of the
following when it comes to cable provider VOD ala Netflix:

* Poor/spotty service (I mean look at the VOD that's currently sent through your cable box..) * It will come as a premium add on that requires you to have home cable service * It is not going to be a cheap service for the consumer, but it will probably be a cheap expense for the provider (see: SMS) * Your movie options will be greatly limited in favor of using your cable box

We'll see. These companies need to get with the picture, although that picture
is probably going to cost extra just to sell you the frame and nail to hang it
with.

------
hippich
Work in office during day, and work on personal projects during evenings.

Do not have TV for like.... a lot of years.

Found discount movie theater nearby and go there over weekends sometimes with
my wife (she also totally busy during week).

You know what? When you go to movie theater just a few times per month - you
really enjoy the show! And nice restaurant after is a great culmination =)
Treat yourself, not bloat!

------
shawnee_
Television content distribution has historically been push model marketing.

One problem was that nobody ever really "knew" with any measurable degree of
accuracy how many people were actually watching any given show. Nielsen
ratings (and I actually received $5 and the survey in the mail 10 years ago,
when I was a televisionless University student), as hyped as they are, were
more or less guesstimates totally dependant upon people telling them exactly
what they're watching and when. Even the demographics can get somewhat skewed
-- educated people would be more likely to return the survey than non.

It makes more sense that this new emerging Internet-based distribution model
would be more to the liking of those who are reliant upon an advertising-based
revenue model for the simple fact that they can have more accurate numbers
showing them how many viewers they have. But instead they whine and complain
that they're losing money on a system that was never really optimized for
their core purpose.

------
adestefan
There's still one thing missing from the non-cable services: live sports.

~~~
krschultz
If only I could just pay for football Sundays, March Madness, and the NBA
playoffs. My TV sits idle the rest of the time.

~~~
rgraham
Get an HDTV antenna. Fox and CBS broadcast most of the NFL games and they do
so in HD, OTA for free. ABC buys you college football.

March Madness was streamed online this last go. Add CBS from above.

Get an internet provider that grants you ESPN 360 and you get most college
football and half the NBA playoffs. I'm sure TNT will come around at some
point for the other half. There is always a night out with friends.

------
laconian
What drove me to cut was this: the content is getting steadily worse,
bandwidth is becoming exponentially cheaper for providers, and yet - the price
just kept going up.

I would expect to pay less YOY instead!

My in-laws subscribe to a cable service in France called "Neuf", that gives
them phone, television, and Internet for something like 30 euros a month. I
turned green with envy when I discovered that. THAT is a price that I think is
reasonable.

------
akeck
We used to do cable service plus local video rental, because between spotty
reception and the low resolution of broadcast TV, the experience wasn't that
great. We would make the pilgrimage to the video store multiple times a week
for everything else. We generally watch only the majors (ABC, etc.) and PBS
affiliates, so the large channel selection of cable doesn't add much value. We
made a decent antenna and now do over-the-air HDTV for our appointment
viewing. It's gorgeous and free. We use Netflix DVD/streaming to get the rest
of the content we watch. Netflix+Internet+OTA fulfills our needs at a much
lower price point and much greater flexibility. The cable model needs improve
to compete. It would be compelling for me with things like per-channel a la
carte pricing and price parity between HD and SD service. The one thing I find
compelling about the cable model today that's been hard for me to do
personally is digital recording. For OTA HD recording, one either has to be
able to afford TIVO or spend a significant amount of time and some money hand-
building a DVR system.

------
ck2
And my internet cost has skyrocketed because of it (mostly because there's no
competition).

------
ww520
www.topchan.tv is developed for people to seek alternative video content.
Below are some examples of video not on the traditional TV.

The Game channel <http://www.topchan.tv/show/public1/10> has game play
recordings and streaming.

The VLOG channel <http://www.topchan.tv/show/public1/12> has video blogs from
people on Youtube.

The TED channel <http://www.topchan.tv/show/public1/264> has the TED
presentations.

------
JoeAltmaier
Is it too much to hope that Americans are getting outside more?

~~~
technoslut
No, we're getting fatter and lazier. If we're getting outside it's only to
drive to our local fast food restaurant.

------
Triumvark
Cable cutting numbers are so low as to be almost unmeasurable.

So why are Hulu and Netflix hamstrung by content creators as a threat to
revenue again?

~~~
ams6110
I cut my cable back to the "basic" TV level last year (which is local stations
plus a handful of others). I only kept it at all because it is cheaper to get
internet + basic TV than it is to have internet alone (Comcast).

I do miss having the ESPNs but nothing else really. We have Netflix and can
get ESPN 360 on the Xbox so that's a bit of a consolation.

