SlideshowCord Cutting? 'Fraid so.

mhhf1ve 10/12/2015 | 4:34:48 PM
How big can Twitch get? Virtual sporting events are where it will be at... Cord cutters now may still want to see big guys get brain injuries on a grass-covered field. But maybe someday, it'll all be virtual games and real-time strategy channels.... :P
Phil_Britt 10/11/2015 | 4:21:37 PM
Re: Competing on Price Mitch,


Pro sports is the game changer -- or ungame changer, depending on your perspective. NFL Direct Ticket is huge for AT&T/Direct TV. But ESPN has a trophy case of other content. If there are certain college teams, local pro teams or other sports one has an interest in, there is no acceptable OTT package now or in the foreseeable future.
mhhf1ve 10/9/2015 | 7:29:14 PM
Re: Competing on Price >  Which individual channels do you have to subscribe to for all that?

Aren't kids just going to go to bittorrent files if things get too confusing or expensive? All the fragmentation of where content is available is going to make things really hard for broadband providers. I think that's where broadband caps are going to come into play... and more metered data for every internet connection. 
Mitch Wagner 10/9/2015 | 3:40:17 PM
Re: Competing on Price Consumers find cable packages confusing. 

A la carte is just going to be more confusing. 

You want to see Game of Thrones, Doctor Who, a few network shows, and pro sports. Which individual channels do you have to subscribe to for all that?
DHagar 10/7/2015 | 10:10:23 PM
Re: Competing on price KBode, I fully agree.  The competition is now going to force them to come up with competitive packages that consumers want.  I also think they may have to get innovative and have some hybrid packages - a basic package that covers and spreads their cost and then several options that play to the customer, including customized packages.

One other reason they will have to change, recent reports are that few milennials are paying for the current offerings.
inkstainedwretch 10/7/2015 | 2:29:36 PM
Competing on Price I agree, but it isn't so simple. If you, as a cable company, want to offer ESPN (for example), ESPN forces you to also take ESPN 2, ESPN 3, ESPN for Kids, ESPN History, ESPN Cooking, ESPN Kittens...

The industry is already trying to craft skinny bundles. True a la carte will come along eventually.

But I'm going to repeat what I've been saying for years: when we get true a la carte, a lot of people aren't going to like it. Some people will be content paying the same price for their favorite three channels that they're now spending on 500. But a lot more people are going to be unhappy getting so few channels for what they're spending now -- or more.  -- Brian Santo
KBode 10/7/2015 | 10:00:18 AM
Competing on price The cable and broadcast industry could put this entire cord cutting phenomenon to bed immediately by simply finally competing on price and offering more flexible bundles. Their aversion to this is only helping to accelerate the trend.
Ariella 10/7/2015 | 8:53:35 AM
worse than cutting I just saw this: http://www.adweek.com/news/television/new-study-says-2025-half-consumers-under-32-won-t-pay-cable-167400?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Adweek_Newsletter_2015000708&utm_source=sailthru&utm_term=AWK_NewDaily:

An online survey of 32,000 U.S. adults found that 76 percent subscribe to cable. Of the 24 percent who don't pay for cable, 18 percent are cord-nevers—people who have never paid for a cable subscription—while 6 percent are cord cutters, meaning they have canceled their cable subscriptions. The report notes that this year, digital cord-nevers have surpassed cord cutters and represent "the next stage of evolution in TV viewing."
Sign In