Charter, Comcast, Altice Dive as Cable TV Subscriber Losses Mount

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Cable TV companies reported their first quarter results this week, and they were not pretty: Charter lost 122,000 video subscribers, while Comcast and Altice lost 43,000 and 96,000 respectively. Naturally, this trend is expected to continue as more and more consumers shift to streaming services and on-demand video.

Cable TV firms aren't the only losers. AT&T this week said it lost 187,000 pay-TV customers, including satellite TV subscribers and its U-verse landline business. AT&T's DirecTV Now internet streaming service added 312,000 customers. But AT&T garners much lower profit margins from video streaming.
 
Since Comcast is also an ISP this stuff will only really affect the cable division. Sure it's significant but their internet only stands to gain. I'm pretty sure they'll bounce back plus they've got NBC and I think Hulu. We've got a bundle and the contract is up in a year or so. I'm pretty sure at that point I'll be dropping the t.v. part and probably just add Hulu or something similar(already got Amazon/Netflix). At the moment the online presence of many channels are still in development(Disney, CBS, Warner). It's a mixed blessing when you only want one or two shows from these providers. All too easy to make a new monthly spend that was bigger than cable.
 
[21CW]killerofall said:
That's what DVRs are for, skipping ads. I don't watch anything live anymore, not even sports (I start watching those about an hour after they start and skip all of the ads).
Click to expand...
Even that's a pain in the ass with commercial breaks every 7 minutes. I did the same thing as you when I still had Directv, but found myself just letting the stuff sit on the DVR unwatched because you could barely just put the remote down and watch, you're constantly ffw thru commercial breaks.

After I cancelled I picked Netflix back up (we've had an on and off relationship for over a decade) and decided to finally check out Breaking Bad since I couldn't be bothered DVRing more commercials back when it aired. Watched the whole show in a few weeks and it spoiled me from ever watching stuff with commercials again.

That said, I don't really have much interest in most shows to begin with so my tolerance is probably skewed a bit.
 
Cable providers are middlemen for the most part and pay the networks huge fees to distribute their products. Cable companies are also ISPs and the run the internet on their existing infrastructure. Carrying data on their infrastructure with no acquisition fees and charging customers for the modems to boot? Pure profit. Big Cable doesn’t need TV anymore than we do. They will be fine and only stand to get bigger with selling more bandwidth at increased prices. Right back to all their “former” TV customers who cut the cord and buy 80-100 bucks a month in internet only subscriptions.

What we need is real competition in the fast internet space.
 
[21CW]killerofall said:
That's what DVRs are for, skipping ads. I don't watch anything live anymore, not even sports (I start watching those about an hour after they start and skip all of the ads).
Click to expand...
This, I've had a Tivo for about 2 decades now.

EDIT: I do buy some blurays of TV shows nowadays too, and have Amazon, Netflix, and Hulu.
 
Last edited:
Krenum said:
On top of that, if you are a basic / extended cable subscriber, there isn't much to watch on the networks. I don't know how many times I've seen Rambo First Blood on AMC this month.....
Click to expand...

About the only thing I watch live any more is the occasional news show.
120+ channels and I rarely find anything on that's worth watching.
The few shows I watch, I record on my HTPC/DVR and watch later, when I can also skip the commercials.

This does explain why my cable company gave me a long term customer discount this year (for the 1st time ever).
Means my bill (TV & internet) only went up $10/month.
I told them to cancel the TV service last year and they responded with a larger than expected discount, so I'm ok with the small increase this year.

No if they would just implement an ala-cart plan, where I could drop ESPN and just pay for the dozen channels I actually watch.....
 
When live sports streaming legally becomes easier and have paid options I will be dropping cable. I need my NBA fix, and I want to support my team.
 
HiddenMessages said:
Gee, I wonder why. Don't people like paying to watch Ads?
Click to expand...
IMO that's not it, it's the constant yearly increases in cost, those advertised rates are just new subscriber bait, and ultimately monthly subscription is the only reason they have members if instead you got a yearly bill for $1000+ just to watch TV people would be like "fuck this shit"
 
I'm paying way too much to watch all of the Lord of the Rings movies as much as they put them on. I'm ready to get rid of the cable box and just keep the Internet connection, since Comcast is the only broadband provider out here that is actually fast.
 
TheHig said:
Cable providers are middlemen for the most part and pay the networks huge fees to distribute their products. Cable companies are also ISPs and the run the internet on their existing infrastructure. Carrying data on their infrastructure with no acquisition fees and charging customers for the modems to boot? Pure profit. Big Cable doesn’t need TV anymore than we do. They will be fine and only stand to get bigger with selling more bandwidth at increased prices. Right back to all their “former” TV customers who cut the cord and buy 80-100 bucks a month in internet only subscriptions.

What we need is real competition in the fast internet space.
Click to expand...

The problem with that (not competition) is no matter how you cut it, they were making money most likely on TV... They now have to do something to get those profit back. That effort is just to maintain their current profit.

Which will be raising internet rates. Without net neutrality they could in theory offer various priced offerings for various "streaming" quality settings (I would argue speed does the same thing). Allowing these cost increases to only effect those using more GBs.

Though cable companies are like cell providers, any move is to manipulate customers to pay more while selling it as a feature (yes.. in a specific way I think is not just capitalism).

I am sure we will see a new push by comcast selling their streaming service and proudly tout how it won't count against your monthly usage, while netflix does...

Yes internet competition would be awesome...
 
I'm new to Spectrum cable TV- built into my rent- so I've been trying it out a bit.

Selection is still below average, but there are a few shows that I get that I'd have otherwise gotten on Prime; but what's struck me the most is the shear crappiness of the picture quality. Netflix and Prime aren't perfect, but they're far closer to Blu-ray than the cable channels are, let alone 4k.
 
dandirk said:
The problem with that (not competition) is no matter how you cut it, they were making money most likely on TV... They now have to do something to get those profit back. That effort is just to maintain their current profit.

Which will be raising internet rates. Without net neutrality they could in theory offer various priced offerings for various "streaming" quality settings (I would argue speed does the same thing). Allowing these cost increases to only effect those using more GBs.

Though cable companies are like cell providers, any move is to manipulate customers to pay more while selling it as a feature (yes.. in a specific way I think is not just capitalism).

I am sure we will see a new push by comcast selling their streaming service and proudly tout how it won't count against your monthly usage, while netflix does...

Yes internet competition would be awesome...
Click to expand...
Depending on what they would do with cable TV, I agree, they might be looking at getting it with both barrels there, and have to start abusing their position elsewhere.
Make no mistake, for decades they have been abusing their position, and as such made billions, while they left us with an overpriced product that is absolute garbage.
The first cable company that goes to a no-cost to customer model might be the one to survive, grow even.. you could add a no-ad cost to customer model too, if that is feasible (it might not be, other than streaming, I don't know how their feeds work).
However internet access prices are high enough already, abusing their position there, might be possible (I think they can at least for a while), but it could also backfire.. if 5G ends up with a lot of unused spectrum, cell companies might start selling service to houses at reasonable prices. The dream of starlink might just work out, and googles balloons insanity might work. Fiber deployment, is nicely locked out by rules and shit, cable companies did a nice job there... but I think other than the rules they managed to corruptly have there... while difficult, and yes costly with micro trenching and shit like that it is not impossible to lay fiber, it can be done... so abusing their position, might work for a bit, but could explode in their faces too.
 
HiddenMessages said:
Gee, I wonder why. Don't people like paying to watch Ads?
Click to expand...

This is the thing. There was a time where subscription TV meant no ads. Then the cable companies realized they could double dip and fuck people anyhow. I would actually reconsider cable/sat if there was an ad free package. Give me 30 actual minutes of programming, no 22 and dropping. Until that happens, they can fuck right off and I'll keep netflix and Prime. There isn't anything on TV I need to watch badly enough that I'll pay for any service that forces ads. This is why I absolutely will not subscribe to hulu. They tried that cable business model bullshit so fuck them.
 
The irony I've been thinking about the last 5+ years is that cable/sat t.v. has actually become just another form of digital streaming anyway. Even more so since some have actually bundled apps in them. Their boxes/dvr's are nothing more than a android/linux type device that provides the interface. The t.v. model most remember began to disappear back when HD was adopted. So that being said, t.v. vs internet isn't the issue so much as the business model used in the service delivery. BTW I just remembered reading a few weeks ago about Comcast getting together with Netflix. They've already been doing so for a few years but it's even more so now.
 
Has nothing to do with Ads, has everything to do with the content. TV Sucks. Absolutely nothing on I want to watch.
 
- Cost
- Quality of shows and the cookie cutter copy they all are
- Ads in between show segments
- Ads IN the show segments on bottom of screen
- Ads IN the show itself (looking at you Bones and your windows phone + toyota addiction)

The above are why I don't partake in TV. Only show I actively watch is Forged in Fire and that is via season purchase on Amazon. Used to watch Top Gear before the breakup, now those and the Grand Tour are awful.
 
Back when I was a youngin', this was my first interface to cable tv. Ah, the good ol' days.

hamlin.jpg

If you want live TV without the sports, check out Philo.com (I am not their whore, just a customer). Only downer is Philo does not have SyFy.
 
Just as the old copper line for telephones was outmoded, so thus is cable tv.

Cable is dead. Long live cable.
 
Comcast's solution to the problem? Increase fee's, increase cost, increase contract term, charge for bandwidth, lower speeds. And they wonder why everyone is leaving them. Fucking cunts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top