Fortunately cutting cable was a no brainer for me as I wasn’t about to be fleeced for the two or three channels I would watch out of their extensive (and expensive) lineup. Going for their “basic” lineup made no sense either, that’s all available OTA.
All that’s left for me on TWC is their ISP service since I have no alterrnative other than the outrageously priced notorious Verizon. If you’re not into demanding high speed apps you could get by with TWC’s $14.95 internet service. Only 3.5 mbps but good enough for Tablo and other basic apps.
The problem for me is that SlingTV is doing just this - unless you actually want all of the channels that they give you. For us, my husband wants ESPN during football season, so we pay for SlingTV during that time period just for one channel. If there were any other way to get ESPN, I wouldn’t touch SlingTV with a 10-foot pole. Sports is the ideal content for the live tv format and really the only reason I would consider a live TV package, but does SlingTV offer a sports package? No - they split ESPN into one package and NFL Network/Fox Sports/Comcast Sports into the other package so if you want ESPN and NFL Network just for football, you have to pay $45 a month for every channel under the sun. This is the cable business model.
This is just a temporary stage, though. My kids and their friends don’t watch any live TV. Everything is YouTube or Netflix and such. And they watch less and less sports because sports is the hardest thing for them to watch the way they like to watch. The industry will have to change if they want to capture the future generations, because future generations are not going to suddenly change and go back to the old ways. They don’t need to buy a bundle to get something they want because they never became attached to anything in that bundle in the first place.
You are absolutely right about this.
I’m with you on the sports, also. My biggest problem is being able to watch live out of market games of my team without paying an exorbitant price for it (I’m looking at you DirecTV and NFL Sunday Ticket).
As for the Sling TV package, I don’t want every channel in their packages (I don’t speak Spanish, for example), but it is much closer to the content I want for the price I’m willing to pay. Also, you may or may not be aware, but according to their help center if you subscribe to the Blue package you’re supposed to be able to use the Sling credentials to log into the WatchESPN app on various platforms and you shouldn’t have to subscribe to the sports extra package.
Neither cable, satellite or streaming want to implement pure a la carte selection. Technically it is doable (e.g. Netflix) but it scares the hell out of them. ESPN has stated through Disney (owners of ABC\ESPN) that ESPN will be offering in the future a streaming package separate from any other packages BUT (notice the BUT) it will offer sports not already included in any cable TV packages. This is to protect the existing cable business model. So in effect ESPN will be offering a bullsh*t package pretending it is “ESPN” - suckering people in who think they will be getting the real “ESPN.”
@Vonda_Z is right - all these streaming packages are variants of the cable business model. If I can get a hockey or baseball package for a season at $150, why do I need a bundle of 30 channels for $500 a year (90% of which I couldn’t care less about)?
Canada was supposed to implement a la carte TV but instead they are getting the “skinny” or “thin” package SCAM.
The NHL got it right in offering either a full hockey package or the ability to select to follow just one team.
It appears that all these cable and streaming businesses have established a minimum of money (a floor) they want from the consumer ($30 and up) and will not offer you a $3.95 a month deal for a specific channel. It’s as if a grocery store was not interested in selling you a carton of milk but required you to buy bread, cereal and eggs along with the milk.
I agree. I think the NHL, NBA and MLB all offer very similar packages for cord cutters at reasonable prices. The NFL is the holdout. Sure I could get Game Pass for $100 a year but I want to watch the games LIVE, not delayed and I don’t want to pay $300 for it. Ugh.
Agreed. I sure wouldn’t mind $30 if I got to pick my own 30-40 channels in that package.
I think apart from the economics of the cable business model, the antagonism towards cable companies has to do with their atrocious customer service (as pointed out above in the original post). Being a monopoly in most areas, without any true competition, cable companies don’t have to do anything to improve service!
However they are not purely private services. They use public land (the public right of way - 3 to 5’ of land from the street to the home) to route their cables. Google has an interesting service planned - fiber 90% of the way and then the old copper telephone line to the home for house access where 100% fiber is not possible. Competition is coming…
1 Like
I will say that Comcast has provided me very good service this year, much more than I expected based on all the horror stories. Between ordering service, fixing a problem where my internet was dying each day, and adding and subtracting unlimited data, the reps have been friendly, informative, and responsive.
AT&T also had very good service for me as both a Uverse and cell phone customer. I only left Uverse because Comcast has so much better speeds.
This conversation should really be about the fact that we all define ‘value’ differently. I personally don’t care what shows/channels I get, as long as I get programs that I like. Yes, when I dropped cable I lost Workaholics, Walking Dead, The Last Ship, and others. But you know what? I learned about other shows on OTA that I never knew about, plus realized that probably 50% of what I was recording on my DVR was from OTA channels anyways. I’m now a fan of new (to me) shows like Blue Bloods and Batman (yes, Adam West Batman). I also started watching more of the unknown Netflix originals and realized that the Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt pretty much tickles my funny bone equally as much as Workaholics. I can live without certain TV shows; others will fill the void. Now that I know what’s free OTA, I don’t ever see going back. I also don’t see the logic behind replacing one monthly fee with another (like Sling TV). As an added bonus to cutting the cord, my setup is now EASIER to use. I have one remote and no more switching inputs (thank you, Roku TV). With fewer auxiliary devices needed (No more DVR/STB, no more Roku, no more BD player needed now that I digitized all my blu-rays through Vudu), I downgraded my 5-input Audio receiver and Harmon-Kardon speakers for a simple1-input Vizio wireless 5.1 surround bar setup.
I went so far as to chart out my Tablo savings calculator which graphs out what I paid to switch and what I would be paying for continued cable service. I Cut the Cord about 16 months ago and just last month I broke even when considering the up-front cost of equipment (new TV, new 4-Tuner Tablo, New Sound Bar, New TV cabinet) and the lifetime Tablo subscription fee. And I’m not even taking into consideration the money I got for selling my old components (Roku + Home theater equipment). Now I consider Tablo an investment. Each month from here on out, I’m pretty much putting about $80 in my pocket. I still waste just about as much time watching TV as I did before, and my OCD wife loves the lack of cables and remotes/game controllers (she hated my Harmony One). Definitely a win for me!!!
3 Likes
For me, I started down the cord cutter path for financial reasons, but quickly realized I enjoy the experience more as well.
In fact, I really wouldn’t even want cable / satellite back if it was FREE, I wouldn’t watch it enough to even be worth switching TV inputs.
As said above, we all value different things and I think that is where cord cutting shines, it has SO many more options, from more shows / movies to more ways to consume them. We can all find different ways that it is an advantage for each of us personally.
Yes for some that still requires a “skinny” cable like package, for many it does not…
I saw a commercial for a “skinny bundle” from Dish yesterday, so out of curiosity, I checked out their web site. It starts at $39/month, but when I add in a news package I like, 4 TV sets and DVR functionality, it’s up to $80/month, with a 2 year price lock. Hardly a bargain…
I’m not entertaining any thoughts of going back to Satellite/Cable as the OTA setup I have with Tablo and a couple of OTT streaming services, I have more than I can possibly watch, and I’m paying for exactly what I want in terms of Netflix, Hulu, etc. Not to mention the free MLB streaming, Vudu movies, etc. I get for free as a T Mobile subscriber.
Anyway, the whole point I was trying to make was that once again, we see low up front advertised price, but when you add in your extra TVs and DVR, and whatever else you need, the monthly cost becomes substantial, in this case, double.
That’s like the old clothing business. You go in to buy a suit and the store persuades you that you need a new shirt to go with the pants and a new set of shoes to match the suit. What about a tie to go with the whole ensemble?
“So how much did you spend on the suit? $79.95?”
“Yah the suit cost that but the whole bill was $150 since the whole wardrobe had to be spruced up to match. After I put everything on and looked in the mirror, I looked good. The guy in the store convinced me that everything considered the $150 was a great bargain!”
“But you said the suit was only going to cost about $80?”
“Yah but look at everything I’m getting…”