# TiVo's Rogers to MSOs: Let them cut the cord....



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

http://www.fiercecable.com/story/ti.../2015-06-26?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal

Best quarter in 8 years due to Roamio OTA. Good job TiVo!


----------



## JBDragon (Jan 4, 2004)

I cut the cord over 3 years ago and a couple months ago got the Tivo Roamio OTA unit. I have zero plans to even going back to paying for cable TV. I have since gotten 2 Tivo Mini's and a Tivo Stream since then. Other then some minor things it's great. I'm also glad I have no monthly fee's on any of my Tivo hardware. The $299 deal on my Roamio OTA with lifetime service was nice. I'm glad that silly monthly fee on the Mini went away to Lifetime included in the price. Everyone is trying to get you to sign up for whatever monthly fee and it all adds up. 

I used to have a $170 Comcast bill per month. I moved, Went to U-Verse for a few years, and now I'm back to Comcast for $50 a month for 105Mbps service. Netflix and Amazon Prime I had before I cut the cord so i really don't consider them a extra charge. Hulu, no way would I pay for that crap. Really, there's no need to. Really the ONLY reason to keep cable is if your a Sports Junky!!! Even then you could get SlingTV for $20 a month and get ESPN with that and a bunch of cable channels. TO me that price is to high.

When you cut the cord, a little less TV can be a good thing. Just getting Broadcast channels with a Antenna and Netflix and really, that's all you need. With all the money you save, you could get a couple season passes. I do this for AMC's "The Walking Dead" I get it in cheap SD format from Amazon which still looks great to me on my 50" Plasma. You see the new Episode the following day it airs and it's Commercial free and you own it. A couple season passes on those FEW shows you would really miss and that's it. If you start subscribing to all these services, you end up not saving any money!!! For Example I'm saving $120 a month. That was from a Comcast price 3+ years ago when I was paying for HD Cable TV with a duel HD tuner. $120 a month for 12 months is $1,440 per year in savings. Of course after my 12 months of Internet service the price will jump up, but not much as I'll drop the speed back down to maybe 50Mbps service which is still more then good enough for my needs. As couple SD season passes at $20 or so a pop is cheap!!!

You have to look at things cheaply. For example, if you like Game of Thrones on HBO, wait until the season is over, Sign up for HBO NOW for $15 a month, and watch all the new Episodes in a month time and then cancel service and repeat next season!!! $15 for the whole season, what a deal!!!! Why pay $180 a year for it? It may be worth it if you watch HBO all the time, all year long and pretty much mostly HBO then $15 a month is a not bad. Doing this is 100% legal!!! Netflix at $8 a month is a steal. While searching for something you may not find what you want, going exploring, you can find all kinds of interesting programs you never thought of watching!!! There's also a ton of Kids programs. My brothers Kids, that's pretty much all they watch is Netflix. That's a steal right there!!!!

If you really need to sign up to a bunch of services, you're probably better off keeping Cable TV then doing that. Cutting the cord, I'm free at last!! yes it's not truly cutting the cord, you still need something for Internet. It's not like the old days before the Internet!!! Back with few Analog TV channels. There's more Digital channels these days because they can take that 1 Analog channel and turn it into 2-3 Digital channels!!!
back then few Antenna channels or Cable and HBO was the only premium channel. Back when MTV really was Music TV!!! I'd go as much as I could next door just to watch some MTV. I didn't grow up with Cable. When I moved out i had it for 18 years. Now I'm free. Again it's NOT for everyone!!!

To me, keeping $1400+ a year in my pocket and not going to Comcast is a WIN!!! That's money I can use to do some work on my House and or take a vacation. Whatever!!!


----------



## leswar (Apr 14, 2005)

I like your thinking.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Another reason they need an OTA with built in Stream. Would make it the complete cord cutter package.


----------



## foghorn2 (May 4, 2004)

I kinda like having the steam seperate, if that circuit goes, just replace it. But yeah, for areolas, and integrated stream makes more sense.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

foghorn2 said:


> I kinda like having the steam seperate, if that circuit goes, just replace it. But yeah, for *areolas*, and integrated stream makes more sense.


I do not think that means what you think it means...


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

ncted said:


> I do not think that means what you think it means...


Perhaps iPhone auto-correct has coined a new term for Aereo owners, Aereolas? Or was that Legolas' daughter? I'm no Colbert.


----------



## sangs (Jan 1, 2003)

Steamed areolas, interesting.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

Areolas. And integrated streaming. 

/facepalm


----------



## JBDragon (Jan 4, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> Another reason they need an OTA with built in Stream. Would make it the complete cord cutter package.


I have the Tivo Stream also. and it's hidden away with my other networking stuff. But it's not perfect. I'm still looking at hooking up my old Slingbox Pro to my Tivo Mini and watch that way. I think the Streaming would work better.

Built in though would be better. How much to the overall cost could it really be? It can't be much. Most of the stuff needed the Tivo already has. 1 Chip and some programming in the Tivo?


----------



## JBDragon (Jan 4, 2004)

leswar said:


> I like your thinking.


Thanks. You just have to think Cord Cutting Ways to save money!!! Everything I said was 100% legal. Saving a couple bucks, who cares. Might as well keep doing what you're doing if you really need to sign up to a bunch of crap.

On the other hand, learning a few tricks to watch more content for FREE Legally, and maybe watch a little less TV and go outside for a change. Do a little yard work. Visit Family and friends, or simply read a book!!! I think I still waste to much time in front of the TV myself.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

JBDragon said:


> I have the Tivo Stream also. and it's hidden away with my other networking stuff. But it's not perfect. I'm still looking at hooking up my old Slingbox Pro to my Tivo Mini and watch that way. I think the Streaming would work better.
> 
> Built in though would be better. How much to the overall cost could it really be? It can't be much. Most of the stuff needed the Tivo already has. 1 Chip and some programming in the Tivo?


If they added the actual Stream hardware used in the standalone Stream or Roamio Plus/Pro it could add quite a bit. However I believe the chipset being used by the Roamio actually has the ability to transcode to H.264 as well. So if they were to use that, rather then the special chip, it would be free. Not sure if that's possible or not, but if it is then that would be a boon to the OTA.


----------



## kokishin (Sep 9, 2014)

foghorn2 said:


> I kinda like having the steam seperate, if that circuit goes, just replace it. But yeah, for areolas, and integrated stream makes more sense.


Norm Crosby?


----------



## Scarpad (Dec 7, 2000)

how are you getting 105 download for $50 they are charging me $62 for 25


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

JBDragon said:


> To me, keeping $1400+ a year in my pocket and not going to Comcast is a WIN!!! That's money I can use to do some work on my House and or take a vacation. Whatever!!!


Typical cord cutter exaggeration.

Let's see

1) Tivo cost not deducted from monthly savings.

2) Walking Dead and other series not deducted from monthly savings

3) ....compares savings to cost of one of the more expensive cable tv packages. (always triple digits or higher.)

check, check and check


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Dan203 said:


> Another reason they need an OTA with built in Stream. Would make it the complete cord cutter package.


Yeah that what I was thinking. You'd think they have that out to market already.

ON the other hand OTA is 4 major channels.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

trip1eX said:


> Walking Dead and other series not deducted from monthly savings


A lot of people are OK with being a season behind and just watching these shows via Netflix.



trip1eX said:


> ON the other hand OTA is 4 major channels.


5 if you count The WB.

The Stream is even more useful for OTA subscribers though. Since there is no copy protection on OTA channels everything an OTA records is streamable, even OOH.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

Dan203 said:


> A lot of people are OK with being a season behind and just watching these shows via Netflix. 5 if you count The WB. The Stream is even more useful for OTA subscribers though. Since there is no copy protection on OTA channels everything an OTA records is streamable, even OOH.


......and PBS and CW makes 6 and 7.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The CW is what I meant. They replaced The WB a long time ago. So with PBS that would be 5 and 6.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Major MSOs are not going to go for this. Maybe a small MSO that can't get decent carriage rates or something and is forced to drop video anyway, but Comcast isn't going to be pushing OTA anytime soon. They are raking it in with Triple Play and that's not going to change. And any major ISP that has enough bandwidth for streaming video (VDSL, cable, fiber) has enough bandwidth to offer their own TV service.

The Roamio OTA is a good growth strategy for TiVo, however. Cord cutting is a niche, but even a niche of 1% in the US is roughly a million potential subs for this thing, and there are probably more than 1% of households who have or will cut the cord, as well as traditionally OTA-only households, which are a surprisingly large percentage (something like 15%).

Considering how hard it is to convince people to buy a TiVo and put it on cable/FIOS, I think that this could be a huge growth opportunity, since their MSO growth is limited by the small partner MSOs' footprints, while OTA is not.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

trip1eX said:


> Typical cord cutter exaggeration.
> 
> Let's see
> 
> ...


Yeah, it is more like $600 for me in real world savings. Still, not chump change. We're using the money we save to go towards season tickets to the theater: http://www.dpacnc.com IMHO, a better way to spend our entertainment dollars.

In any case, I know very few people who aren't interested in going OTA. Most of them have switched or plan to in the near future. The ones that aren't interested are still sick of paying the ridiculous rates, and they tend to switch between cable and satellite (or threaten to) every couple of years to keep their costs down.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

trip1eX said:


> Typical cord cutter exaggeration.
> 
> Let's see
> 
> ...


Is this better?

Were I just deciding to cut cable today, knowing all I know, I would buy this...

High Speed Internet: $46.99/month
Netflix: $7.99/month
Netgear R6300: $150
91XG (2): $124
Y10-7-13: $60
EDA-2800: $55
RCA TVPRAMP1R: $22
Channel Master DVR+ (3): $525

So, that would be $936 invested plus $45 per month for high speed internet and Netflix. Over five years, that would cost me $60.60 per month. My antennas would be in the attic for ease of access and longevity and I'd have a guide, trick play, and recording on the televisions we use most.

At this time, I have a little more hardware installed. Some of it is not used very much...

High Speed Internet: $46.99/month
Netflix: $7.99/month
Netgear R6300: $150
OOMA Hub/Scout/Lifetime: $205
91XG (2): $124
Y10-7-13: $60
EDA-2800: $55
RCA TVPRAMP1R: $22
DTVPal DVR (3): $525
Channel Master DVR+ (3): $525
TiVo Roamio OTA (2): $600
TiVo Mini: $140
Simple DVR w/Lifetime (4): $380
PlayOn/PlayLater/HD Plugins: $90
Roku 2 XS (3): $210
BDP-S5200: $60
Fire TV: $99
Fire Stick: $24

So, that would be $3269 invested plus $55 per month for high speed internet and Netflix. Over five years, that would cost me $110 per month. I have antennas inside and out, DVRs on seven televisions (plus two DTVPals in storage), whole house DVRs, streamers, PlayOn, Plex, and dial tone.

As an early adopter, I have tried a lot of things. I've only had two DVRs and one BD player fail over the years. A lot of this stuff is being used in other people's homes. Still, it was part of the cord cutting experiment...

High Speed Internet: $46.99/month
Netflix: $7.99/month
Netgear R6300: $150
OOMA Hub/Scout/Lifetime: $205
91XG (2): $124
DB8: $74
DB8e (2): $210
Y5-7-13: $30
Y10-7-13: $60
EDA-2800: $55
RCA TVPRAMP1R: $22
CM-7777: $50
Mast: $135
DTVPal DVR (5): $1000
Channel Master DVR+ (3): $525
TiVo Roamio OTA (2): $600
TiVo Mini: $140
Simple DVR w/Lifetime (7): $556
PlayOn/PlayLater/HD Plugins: $90
Roku 2 XS (3): $210
Roku LT (3): $128
SMP-N200 (4): $200
BDP-S5100: $52
BDP-S5200 (2): $120
Fire TV (2): $151
Fire Stick: $24
Insignia BD Player (5): $300

So, that would be $5211 invested plus $55 per month for high speed internet and Netflix. Over five years, that would cost me $142 per month. I have antennas inside and out, DVRs on seven televisions (plus two DTVPals in storage), whole house DVRs, streamers, PlayOn, Plex, and dial tone.

The most I ever paid form phone, internet, and television was $220 per month. That was at the end of my Dish run where we were paying Comcast for internet, and two companies for local and long distance phone service. When I got off my first Comcast promotion, my price was supposed to go to $169.99 plus taxes and fees. I usually use that as my comparison, but that bundle included a decent tier of programming, a DVR, and one other box with the rest of my televisions connected directly to the cable. When I quit Comcast, I was at the end of a $99.99 promo which had a slimmed down programming package. I think the Blast! double play is most comparable in features to my OTA/OTT situation. Blast! is $93.95 plus $10 per month for a modem plus $10 per set top box plus taxes and fees. For seven set top boxes, the per month price runs north of $173.96.

In my market, Blast! includes: NHPTV (PBS), QVC, WBZ-4 (CBS) Boston, WCVB-5 (ABC) Boston, WBIN (IND), WHDH-7 (NBC) Boston, WMUR-9 (ABC) Manchester, WPXG-21 (ION), WLVI-56 (CW) Boston, NHPTV Explore, WSBK myTV38 (MyTV) Boston, WYDN-48 (Daystar), WNEU-60 Manchester, NH, WMFP-62 (IND) Lawrence, Community Access, NECN, Public/Educational/Government Access, Public/Educational/Government Access, Public Access, HSN, WUTF (UniMas), WFXT-25 (FOX) Boston, WUNI (Univision), Public/Educational/Government Access, Public Access, Public/Educational/Government Access, Jewelry Television, and The Weather Channel plus HBO, Showtime, and Streampix.

OTA, I get: 2.1 WGBH Boston (PBS Prime), 2.2 PBS World, 4.1 WBZ Boston (CBS), 4.2 Decades, 5.1 WCVB Boston (ABC), 5.2 MeTV, 7.1 WHDH Boston (NBC), 7.2 This TV, 8.2 Heroes and Icons, 9.1 WMUR Manchester, NH (ABC), 9.2 MeTV, 11.1 WENH Durham (PBS Prime), 11.2 PBS Explore, 11.3 PBS World, 11.4 PBS Create, 25.1 WFXT Boston (Fox), 25.2 Fox Movies!, 25.3 LAFF, 38.1 WSBK Boston (MyTV), 44.1 WGBX Boston (PBS), 44.3 PBS Create, 44.4 PBS Kids, 50.1 WBIN Derry, NH, 50.2 Antenna TV, 50.3 Grit, 56.1 WLVI Boston (CW), 56.2 ZUUS, 62.1 Cozi, 66.2 BounceTV, 66.3 GetTV, 66.4 Escape, 68.1 ION, 68.2 Qubo, and 68.3 ION Life plus Netflix OTT.

So, my savings in the first scenario would be $134 - $61 or $73 per month or $3780 over five years. Basically, OTA yields a 47% savings for comparable product. If I wanted to replicate everything in my home via Comcast, the savings would be $174 - $110 or $64 per month. That's a 37% discount.

Comparing total historical spend to Blast! with three boxes, $134 - $142 would leave me in the hole for $8 per month or $480 over five years which is a 6% premium. Since it's been 63 months since I left Comcast, I will be even in October.

Of course, the second five years more strongly favors OTA all around. Six of my DVRs are less than a year old and I have two lightly used DTVPal DVRs lovingly stored. It's conceivable that my cost could be $98 per month (my internet price is guaranteed for life) and it's likely Blast! will be more expensive.

I've spent more than I realized playing with OTA and OTT. I have been extravagant in my purchases to the point where savings alone does not justify the change. On the other hand, I've had a lot of fun and learned a lot. My infrastructure is tailored to my family's needs. In many ways, it far exceeds the Blast! offering in capability. A lot of the devices I no longer use are being used by friends and family (rationalization). The biggest plus is that ignoring sunk costs, my monthly nut is $55 and could drop to $47 or even $0 without severely impacting my television experience.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

There seems to be a LOT of over-excitement about cord-cutting in various tech outlets. It is merely a right-sizing of the market, and most people will continue to have cable, at least as long as MSOs like Verizon and Comcast bundle aggressively, and as long as sports are captive to cable.

I know some people who don't have TV now, but eventually they will probably settle down and get it. I can only think of one person using OTA, and they don't really watch it, it's just sort of there to have something to flip through on occasion.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

wizwor said:


> Is this better?
> 
> Were I just deciding to cut cable today, knowing all I know, I would buy this...


WHOA! I can't even follow that mess. Why is there hardware like a router and a Roku in there? Or services like Netflix? Those things have nothing to do with cord cutting and will exist one way or the other. And the cost of internet only is relevant to cord cutting when you look at the price penalty for having HSI only as opposed to HSI with TV. In my case, my HSI is probably in the $50/mo range because it's bundled as part of a Triple Play, where it would be $65-$70 without the bundling.

The fair comparison is basic cable versus OTA, and with many ISPs, like Verizon and Comcast, the monthly cost is about the same. With others, like TWC, that don't bundle aggressively, then OTA does make economic sense compared to basic cable.

No matter what you do, it's not really a fair comparison. OTA isn't cable. No amount of humpty-dumpty puts cable back together. But on the flip side, if you don't watch much of anything on cable outside of the networks that are available OTA, then you probably don't need cable in the first place. It's a right-sizing of the market.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Bigg said:


> There seems to be a LOT of over-excitement about cord-cutting in various tech outlets. It is merely a right-sizing of the market, and most people will continue to have cable, at least as long as MSOs like Verizon and Comcast bundle aggressively, and as long as sports are captive to cable.
> 
> I know some people who don't have TV now, but eventually they will probably settle down and get it. I can only think of one person using OTA, and they don't really watch it, it's just sort of there to have something to flip through on occasion.


So do you consider services like SlingTV and PlayStation Vue to be "cable"? I think they are the next step in this. They will bridge the gap between channels/content that are exclusive to cable and what's available to "cord cutters". Right now the options and features are limited, but as they evolve they could become a major competitor to the MSO provided TV lineup.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

Dan203 said:


> So do you consider services like SlingTV and PlayStation Vue to be "cable"? I think they are the next step in this. They will bridge the gap between channels/content that are exclusive to cable and what's available to "cord cutters". Right now the options and features are limited, but as they evolve they could become a major competitor to the MSO provided TV lineup.


I tried Vue for a couple months through my VPN to philly and I gotta say, if I could've gotten better throughput on the VPN I would've gone that route exclusively along with OTA on my TiVos here in HI.

It was SO MUCH nicer not dealing with TAs, cablecards, MSO eqpt, ignorant CSRs, contracts, yada yada yada. I even got pretty decent image quality at only about 3Mbps thru my VPN. The interface was pretty nice too. Just sign up right through your psn account and off you go. Cancel the same way for ANY reason too.

The only negative I noticed was some of the CSN Philly shows only allowed one episode recorded at a time but it was only the daily shows like SportsNet Central and Quick Slants that I only watch daily anyway. Oh and some of the shows couldn't be watched on the iPad app.

I think it will improve and these things will work themselves out and this will be the direction things will go in.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

Bigg said:


> WHOA! I can't even follow that mess. Why is there hardware like a router and a Roku in there? Or services like Netflix? Those things have nothing to do with cord cutting and will exist one way or the other.


First, it's not a mess. It's an evolving system of entertainment. We started with an antenna and a television, added DVRs, added streamers and streaming services, and so on.








The router is enabling technology. You really cannot stream without sufficient infrastructure. The router gave me gigabit wired and AC wireless. Helped a lot. You cannot watch Netflix without some kind of streamer. We got Netflix when we started 'trimming' cable services.


Bigg said:


> And the cost of internet only is relevant to cord cutting when you look at the price penalty for having HSI only as opposed to HSI with TV. In my case, my HSI is probably in the $50/mo range because it's bundled as part of a Triple Play, where it would be $65-$70 without the bundling.


With OTA, I do not need high speed internet at all. Keeping that and Netflix after booting Comcast, my monthly nut fell from the Comcast price to the cost of Netflix plus HSI. I'm just comparing the triple play cost to the stuff I replaced it with.


Bigg said:


> The fair comparison is basic cable versus OTA, and with many ISPs, like Verizon and Comcast, the monthly cost is about the same. With others, like TWC, that don't bundle aggressively, then OTA does make economic sense compared to basic cable.


OTA is better than basic cable. With basic cable, I had to rent a box for each set. The least expensive boxes were SD. I get more than double the channels Comcast offers as basic.


Bigg said:


> No matter what you do, it's not really a fair comparison. OTA isn't cable. No amount of humpty-dumpty puts cable back together. But on the flip side, if you don't watch much of anything on cable outside of the networks that are available OTA, then you probably don't need cable in the first place. It's a right-sizing of the market.


When I worked for the cable company, I had a box in every room, two remotes for every box, and 100% of available services. That was something. What I got for $169.99/month was nothing special -- one dvr, one other HD box, and some digital channels on my digital TVs...until they encrypted everything. Blast and Basic are less special than that.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

wizwor said:


> Is this better?
> 
> ......


No. Way too long with too much minutiae to bother reading.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Dan203 said:


> A lot of people are OK with being a season behind and just watching these shows via Netflix.


The guy said he buys a series or two. So you have to deduct that from your monthly cord cutting savings.



Dan203 said:


> 5 if you count The WB.


Yeah CW isn't a major network so wasn't counting it. Also not available everywhere. Hell I have cable and I don't even get CW at least not in HD.



Dan203 said:


> The Stream is even more useful for OTA subscribers though. Since there is no copy protection on OTA channels everything an OTA records is streamable, even OOH.


Yeah but I think on average far far fewer channels means far less need to stream stuff.

Plus those cutting the cord are supplmenting their OTA with netflix etc and so have plenty to watch if they want to watch on an ipad or something.

On the other hand cable companies have their streaming services and so maybe a cable customer can rely on those instead of having to stream content from their Tivo!?!?


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

As far the topic about Tivo getting MSOs to peddle OTA Roamios to consumers?

I don't think it makes much sense to most cable companies in most cases.

CAble companies already have hubs built out to support video. I could see how cable could save costs if they could dump all their video equipment/infrastructure and just go broadband. But that only works if they do it 100%. A few customers not subscribing to cabletv saves the cable company nothing.

And then the customer is going to get internet from them anyway. Getting an extra few dollars from selling a Roamio OTA seems like peanuts. Plus dealing with the flakiness of antenna reception? I don't think it would be worth the headaches. They don't own the OTA signal transmission and thus can't guarantee anything. Sounds like a nightmare customer service headache. They have enough problems when they are in control of their signal.

The better play is what they are doing already....a cheap OTA only package sometimes combined with HBO and internet for one low price.

Here I can get the major OTA stuff plus some SD content like TBS and ABC Family along with HBO for $32/mo. That's $17/mo subtracting out $15/mo for HBO. Of course add in cablecard and taxes it might be another $10/mo. But then I think having cable gets me a small ~ $5/mo discount on internet.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Cheap cable packages with access to the most popular channels would be a good way to stem the tide, but most cable companies don't offer those. In fact most cable companies spread the popular channels across multiple tiers so that users are forced to get the most expensive package just to get all the channels they want. Maybe this cord cutting trend will make them rethink that strategy.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

These basic packages are a two edged sword. Availability of less expensive packages may cause subscribers who would not leave to downgrade.

These packages tend not to compete well with OTA/OTT as often they are [mostly] SD and require rented equipment at each television.

What might stem the tide is a loyalty program which rewards customers for not leaving for any reason.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The fact that cable even still offers SD, and usually charges extra for HD, is another stupid trend in my book. Cable needs to get rid of the SD, make HD the default, and offer a "basic" package that includes all the most popular channels if they want to stem the tide. Forcing people to pay for hundreds of channels they don't want or suffer with SD is not a viable option.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Dan203 said:


> The fact that cable even still offers SD, and usually charges extra for HD, is another stupid trend in my book. Cable needs to get rid of the SD, make HD the default, and offer a "basic" package that includes all the most popular channels if they want to stem the tide. Forcing people to pay for hundreds of channels they don't want or suffer with SD is not a viable option.


CAble still charges extra for HD? I thought that practice had disappeared as HD became the norm.

CABle had been keeping analog SD around because many consumers didn't have set top boxes and it was a selling pt to not have to have a box for every tv. I don't know if that still applies given most cable companies have moved to digital. I thought that move meant you needed a box to decrypt even a SD signal

Otherwise the only reason I can see to carry SD still is that it allows them to carry extra channels in the same space, but that wouldn't explain all the duplicate SD/HD channels.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

wizwor said:


> These basic packages are a two edged sword. Availability of less expensive packages may cause subscribers who would not leave to downgrade.


Yeah but that's true for everything.



wizwor said:


> These packages tend not to compete well with OTA/OTT as often they are [mostly] SD and require rented equipment at each television.


The OTA channels in a limited basic cable package are all HD. It's some of the extra stuff that is SD. STuff not found via OTA.

And you may not need a box to view the major networks and PBS in HD. Although I'm basing this on my experience 3 years ago or so in Boston area with FIOS.



wizwor said:


> What might stem the tide is a loyalty program which rewards customers for not leaving for any reason.


Yep. I always hate seeing offers for new customers and not old ones. Makes me do things like cancel cable in my name and put it in wife's name.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> So do you consider services like SlingTV and PlayStation Vue to be "cable"? I think they are the next step in this. They will bridge the gap between channels/content that are exclusive to cable and what's available to "cord cutters". Right now the options and features are limited, but as they evolve they could become a major competitor to the MSO provided TV lineup.


Sort of, although both services are sub-par. The interface of streaming video isn't going to give a good UX when handling live and recorded TV. You can only have one stream at a time, and the channel selection is limited enough that you won't be able to fully reassemble humpty-dumpty in terms of following teams' seasons. And most of all, you can't have TiVo, or any other true DVR with them.

And then add up the cost. Add up the de-bundling fee (where appropriate), SlingTV, HBO at full price (versus bundled), and it's not really any cheaper than just getting a bundle from Comcast or Verizon, but with a far inferior UX, and far less content. Doesn't sound like much of a deal to me.



wizwor said:


> First, it's not a mess. It's an evolving system of entertainment. We started with an antenna and a television, added DVRs, added streamers and streaming services, and so on.


I actually wasn't referring to your physical network, but rather your long post that vacuumed up all sorts of tertiarily-related tech. But while you posted, I'll critique it. It is impressive that you've got a decent schematic of your network. My three main comments would be (1) why so many different DVR systems that are incompatible as opposed to going all-TiVo?, (2) Why is there a 16-port 10/100 switch right in the middle of an otherwise Gig network?, and (3) Radio Shack amps are very questionable, although I suppose if it's good enough for government work, then it's good enough.



> The router is enabling technology. You really cannot stream without sufficient infrastructure. The router gave me gigabit wired and AC wireless. Helped a lot. You cannot watch Netflix without some kind of streamer. We got Netflix when we started 'trimming' cable services.


And? Your circuit breaker box powers all the stuff. Should you include that in your calculations? It's probably more relevant, since the router is there streaming or not, cord-cutting or not, but these devices may actually use more or less power than another. TiVos use power, but probably way less than some of those cable boxes.

Netflix also shouldn't be part of the equation. It's different content, and it's an in addition to, not an instead of cable. Of course people who have cut the cord keep Netflix, but so do people who have cable.



> With OTA, I do not need high speed internet at all. Keeping that and Netflix after booting Comcast, my monthly nut fell from the Comcast price to the cost of Netflix plus HSI. I'm just comparing the triple play cost to the stuff I replaced it with.


Well, you don't need grid electricity or running water either. You could use propane and solar panels and have an outhouse and live off-grid. But let's assume a normal, modern standard of living with grid electricity, running water, and high speed internet.

Of course if you have Triple Play, then you have to subtract out the cost of HSI, since you need to have that anyway.



> OTA is better than basic cable. With basic cable, I had to rent a box for each set. The least expensive boxes were SD. I get more than double the channels Comcast offers as basic.


With most basic cable subs, you get the junk subchannels *plus* a few others, so you end up with more on basic cable. A TiVo system can eliminate the box issue too, just like with a full-fledged cable/FIOS package.



> When I worked for the cable company, I had a box in every room, two remotes for every box, and 100% of available services. That was something. What I got for $169.99/month was nothing special -- one dvr, one other HD box, and some digital channels on my digital TVs...until they encrypted everything. Blast and Basic are less special than that.


I had a bundle for like $120/mo for a while that included Preferred, Blast! and HBO, it is $80-$90 for the first year. When Blast! alone is somewhere in the $65-$70/mo range, you can start to see where the numbers lead you. Of course it depends on the market quite a bit, as if you have no competition, it is hard to retain teaser rates, whereas you can keep them forever in a competitive market, either by threatening to leave, or if that doesn't work, actually leaving.



trip1eX said:


> The better play is what they are doing already....a cheap OTA only package sometimes combined with HBO and internet for one low price.


Exactly.



wizwor said:


> These basic packages are a two edged sword. Availability of less expensive packages may cause subscribers who would not leave to downgrade.


On the flip side, they keep the subs on the books as video subs. The cable providers have fought hard to get more subs on the books on video and phone, even if their actual revenue from adding $10-$20/mo on for phone is relatively small, because the more services they sell, the better they can amortize investments on the plant, which is generally >90% video, and <10% phone and internet.

It looks good for the stockholders, and the margins are probably decent, since there aren't that many channels in these things, and they cut out all the expensive cable channels.



trip1eX said:


> CAble still charges extra for HD? I thought that practice had disappeared as HD became the norm.


It depends on the provider, and even the market. Some Comcast areas charge for HD programming, others for HD equipment. Yeah, it's a nightmare.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

Bigg said:


> I had a bundle for like $120/mo for a while that included Preferred, Blast! and HBO, it is $80-$90 for the first year. When Blast! alone is somewhere in the $65-$70/mo range, you can start to see where the numbers lead you. Of course it depends on the market quite a bit, as if you have no competition, it is hard to retain teaser rates, whereas you can keep them forever in a competitive market, either by threatening to leave, or if that doesn't work, actually leaving.


Exactly - everyone wants to jump on the cord cutter bandwagon but I've had a Comcast double play promo (Blast! HSI + all cable channels + HBO) for years now and I still pay less than $100 a month. If you're cutting the cord you're still paying for HSI and usually can't get much of a deal on that alone, so if you're paying $50/mo.+ just for HSI it's not a bad deal at all to pay less than $50/mo. extra for all the cable content too. Especially when you consider that your monthly costs for all those streaming services to 'cut the cord' will easily be more than half that extra cost anyway.

And now you get to record and skip commercials in all that content too...


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

slowbiscuit said:


> Exactly - everyone wants to jump on the cord cutter bandwagon ...


I agree with you and Bigg that for many (maybe most) families double/triple play cable packages are a very good deal.

That said there seems to be a very large number of households that want Netflix regardless if they have cable or not. Same is true for Amazon Prime having or not having cable doesn't seem to be a deciding factor for people who purchase it. In fact everyone I know that has Netflix and/or Amazon Prime also has cable or satellite. So for many/most people the cost of Netflix and/or Amazon Prime doesn't really figure into the decision to drop or reduce their cable sub.

My take is that some people - my guess is mostly those with no kids and only 1-2 people in the household that are not sport addicts, are finding that between Netflix and/or Amazon Prime and OTA there is more content than they have time to watch and they are the ones starting to question the value of also maintaining a cable/satellite sub. That's what happened to me and I don't even sub to Netflix or Amazon Prime.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

atmuscarella said:


> My take is that some people - my guess is mostly those with no kids and only 1-2 people in the household that are not sport addicts, are finding that between Netflix and/or Amazon Prime and OTA there is more content than they have time to watch and they are the ones starting to question the value of also maintaining a cable/satellite sub. That's what happened to me and I don't even sub to Netflix or Amazon Prime.


This describes my situation exactly. However, most of my friends have families as well, and they still have plenty to watch between OTA, Netflix, etc.

The exceptions are still the sports fans, except the MLB fans who all seem very happy with MLB.com.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

Nine of the top ten prime time shows are on broadcast TV. Game of Thrones is the only cable TV show in the Top 10.

I would think there are tens of millions of people who would be satisfied with OTA and HBO streaming.

If you leave off HBO you could forgo broadband internet with a company like Freedompop who will provide 500MB of 4G data for free, if you buy a device from them. That's more than enough to download the Tivo guide data.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

shwru980r said:


> Nine of the top ten prime time shows are on broadcast TV. Game of Thrones is the only cable TV show in the Top 10.


Not true. Last Season The Walking Dead had higher ratings then Monday Night Football. It's the highest rated show on TV right now.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

Bigg said:


> Cord cutting is a niche


Tivo itself is niche.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

Dan203 said:


> Not true. Last Season The Walking Dead had higher ratings then Monday Night Football. It's the highest rated show on TV right now.


Not according to Neilsen for the week of June 8.

http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/top10s.html


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

Bigg said:


> I know some people who don't have TV now, but eventually they will probably settle down and get it. I can only think of one person using OTA, and they don't really watch it, it's just sort of there to have something to flip through on occasion.


This is anecdotal evidence which is extremely unreliable and often very inaccurate.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

shwru980r said:


> Not according to Neilsen for the week of June 8. http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/top10s.html


That's because walking dead and Monday night football aren't on in June.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

shwru980r said:


> Not according to Neilsen for the week of June 8.
> 
> http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/top10s.html


Not sure showing the 10 most watched shows with sports taking up the first 3 slots is an argument for dropping cable. Sports is one of the big selling pts for cable tv.

But it is true network tv shows have bigger audiences on average.

However don't forget that network tv audiences have been dramatically eroded over the last 30 years while audiences for cable tv show audiences have been steadily increased. Cable tv shows now often beat network tv shows in the ratings.

And consider that many who are fine with network tv already get OTA or already subscribe to an OTA cable tv package. Many never got cable. And an OTA package from cable has been around forever!!!!!


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

Bigg said:


> I actually wasn't referring to your physical network, but rather your long post that vacuumed up all sorts of tertiarily-related tech.


I added as much detail as I could recall. The reason is that someone considering cutting the cord will likely underestimate the cost of doing so. If you have a list of the pieces and the cost, you can decide what you will need and recalculate your cost.


Bigg said:


> But while you posted, I'll critique it. It is impressive that you've got a decent schematic of your network. My three main comments would be (1) why so many different DVR systems that are incompatible as opposed to going all-TiVo?, (2) Why is there a 16-port 10/100 switch right in the middle of an otherwise Gig network?, and (3) Radio Shack amps are very questionable, although I suppose if it's good enough for government work, then it's good enough.


I have a blog and created that for the blog. It's just a proposition. I've been at this nearly six years. A lot of what I own (TiVo Roamio/OTA @$299.99 w/Lifetime, Channel Master DVR+, Simple DVR) was not available when I started. Some things that were very important then (land line) are not as important now. If something works, I keep it. If something better comes along, I add it.

The first item we tried to trim from our Comcast bill was the landline. Our bill showed a line item of nearly $50/month for dialtone. While I was looking at Vonage and other options (lower monthly fee), I heard about OOMA (no monthly fee). I paid $205 for the box and not a penny since.

It turned out my savings was not close to $50 because I lost my triple play bundle. The next thing we looked at was premium programming. We were not using HBO or Showtime much, so we cut that out and got Netflix plus a bunch of Insignia BD players which happened to stream Netflix as well.

Again, savings were offset by bundle discounts. Next stop was an antenna. Initially, I put one in the attic and snaked a coax down to my bedroom leaving the rest of the house on cable. At that time we had one DVR, one cable box in that bedroom, and a couple televisions directly connected. The kids were already watching Netflix and YouTube, but the wife and I were traditional tv viewers. We decided to give the antenna a go and quit Comcast.

The first thing we realized was that we needed a DVR. We didn't think we used one much, but it turned out that we used trick play a lot. TiVo was too expensive so we got a DTVPal dvr. The 'Pal was quite a treat. EPG, trick play, and time shifting for ~$200. I hadn't had my first for a week when I started looking for a second. I got two more for the kids room and a fifth for the tv on top of our refrigerator. I paid $1000 for five DVRs.

The next thing I got interested in was the whole house DVR. I wanted to archive favorite shows and movies for on-demand viewing. I got a Simple DVR with lifetime for $105 on woot. It was pretty amazing. Not only was it intelligently recording shows for me, but I could access these shows and my antenna from a laptop, a tablet, a cellphone, or a Roku -- at my house, in my yard, and even from a remote location. Next woot, I bought three more at $90 each with lifetime. Simple sent me a dual tuner Simple DVR after they vented the hood and I bought one from Newegg for $90. Last summer, two of my DTVPals started having problems. Once again, I decided the TiVo was too expensive and purchased three DVR+s for $175 a piece on BF. I replaced the failing Pals plus one that was working (the Pals have component out and I wanted to save them for a 36" tube). In May, I jumped on the $299.99 TiVo Roamio/OTA and got a Mini just to see what that was all about. That is why I have so many DVRs.

I don't need gigabit in my house for anything. It just happens that the newest switches I bought came that way. There is only one RS amp. I have had it for decades. It works. 


Bigg said:


> And? Your circuit breaker box powers all the stuff. Should you include that in your calculations? It's probably more relevant, since the router is there streaming or not, cord-cutting or not, but these devices may actually use more or less power than another. TiVos use power, but probably way less than some of those cable boxes.


The electrical service came with my house. We did not have to upgrade service as a consequence of leaving Comcast. We did upgrade the router to improve wireless streaming. I don't own a power monitor, so I have not tried to estimate the electrical cost. I will say, though, that my choice of devices is at least in part driven by efficiency.


Bigg said:


> Netflix also shouldn't be part of the equation. It's different content, and it's an in addition to, not an instead of cable. Of course people who have cut the cord keep Netflix, but so do people who have cable.


As I said earlier, we added Netflix (and PlayOn) to ween us off Comcast content. I would not have Netflix if I had a cable bundle that included premium channels and on-demand.


Bigg said:


> Well, you don't need grid electricity or running water either. You could use propane and solar panels and have an outhouse and live off-grid. But let's assume a normal, modern standard of living with grid electricity, running water, and high speed internet.


Except for streaming, I could replace my HSI with a cell hotspot. 


Bigg said:


> Of course if you have Triple Play, then you have to subtract out the cost of HSI, since you need to have that anyway.


Which I did.


Bigg said:


> With most basic cable subs, you get the junk subchannels *plus* a few others, so you end up with more on basic cable. A TiVo system can eliminate the box issue too, just like with a full-fledged cable/FIOS package.
> 
> I had a bundle for like $120/mo for a while that included Preferred, Blast! and HBO, it is $80-$90 for the first year. When Blast! alone is somewhere in the $65-$70/mo range, you can start to see where the numbers lead you. Of course it depends on the market quite a bit, as if you have no competition, it is hard to retain teaser rates, whereas you can keep them forever in a competitive market, either by threatening to leave, or if that doesn't work, actually leaving.


Too much work for me. I'd rather spend my time and energy messing with OTA than negotiating with Comcast.

We started out talking about the cost of cutting the cord. Put up an antenna and you will save a lot of money. If you want to stream, that's going to cost you. Add some DVRs and the savings fade. At some point, cable is not a bad deal.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

I think one of the motivations for cord-cutting that people often forget is not having to deal with the Cable company any more. I don't even have to do it for my Internet service. Even if I did not save any money by cord-cutting, I would still be happier not giving TWC any of my business. The fact that I *am* saving hundreds of dollars a year is just the icing on the cake.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

shwru980r said:


> Not according to Neilsen for the week of June 8.
> 
> http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/top10s.html


That top ten was likely very different back in March.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

slowbiscuit said:


> Exactly - everyone wants to jump on the cord cutter bandwagon but I've had a Comcast double play promo...


Yup. And HSI-only is even more than $50/mo, since they jack up the rate of HSI when you don't have anything else.



atmuscarella said:


> So for many/most people the cost of Netflix and/or Amazon Prime doesn't really figure into the decision to drop or reduce their cable sub.


This is quite true. And Amazon Prime is basically a freebie from the 2-day shipping.



> My take is that some people - my guess is mostly those with no kids and only 1-2 people in the household that are not sport addicts, are finding that between Netflix and/or Amazon Prime and OTA there is more content than they have time to watch and they are the ones starting to question the value of also maintaining a cable/satellite sub.


Right. Basically people who barely watched cable in the first place are right-sizing their packages. That's good for the market, as it was artificially inflated by years of crappy analog reception and people who started off on $30/mo analog cable and just sort of stayed.



> If you leave off HBO you could forgo broadband internet with a company like Freedompop who will provide 500MB of 4G data for free, if you buy a device from them. That's more than enough to download the Tivo guide data.


Get real. You can also run your whole house off of a small bank of solar panels, and only use a few super-efficient appliances and lights and no air conditioning.



shwru980r said:


> Tivo itself is niche.


TiVo itself is absolutely niche, but the DVR concept is ubiquitous. While X1, Genie, Hopper, and other DVR systems aren't as good as TiVo, they are a lot closer to TiVo than the Sci Atlanta Explorers and Moto iGuide boxes of a few years ago.



shwru980r said:


> This is anecdotal evidence which is extremely unreliable and often very inaccurate.


True. It was in response to a similarly unreliable anecdote.



wizwor said:


> I added as much detail as I could recall.


Some of it, however, just doesn't make sense to include in a comparison about cord cutting.



> I don't need gigabit in my house for anything. It just happens that the newest switches I bought came that way.


Why not complete the chain with a gig switch in the middle?



> The electrical service came with my house. We did not have to upgrade service as a consequence of leaving Comcast. We did upgrade the router to improve wireless streaming.


1. Apparently you needed a new router anyway.

2. Netflix and streaming services have nothing to do with whether you have cable or not, so they're not a factor.



> Except for streaming, I could replace my HSI with a cell hotspot.


You could also replace your power with a few solar panels and batteries, and your indoor plumbing with an outhouse, but most people like modern first-world conveniences.



> We started out talking about the cost of cutting the cord. Put up an antenna and you will save a lot of money. If you want to stream, that's going to cost you. Add some DVRs and the savings fade. At some point, cable is not a bad deal.


Even if cable actually was $70-$100/mo, I wouldn't drop it because the content isn't available elsewhere, and the convenience of TiVo for HBO and other cable shows is huge. However, it's so much less that there's just no way it makes sense to not have cable.

The equation changes a lot for TWC folks who have cheaper unbundled internet, although there I'd still have cable, for mostly the same reasons.

The MSOs' bundling practices are extremely successful in getting people to stay on cable, although in many ways they are more effective as an anti-competitive weapon against DirecTV and DISH than they are against cord cutting, as most people would have one form of pay-TV or another. The companies that are really screwed are DirecTV and DISH, as then you're really paying $100/mo+ for TV, and there isn't a huge market willing to do that. There is the rural market, and some cable systems that just suck, but not being able to go head to head with cable is absolutely hurting them.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

Dan203 said:


> That top ten was likely very different back in March.


I agree. It keeps changing. You picked an earlier point in time to refute my assertion. I picked the more recent point in time to back up my assertion.

I think the general pattern is the same over time. Most every top ten show is on the broadcast networks with one cable show.

It would be a simple to change streaming from HBO to Sling TV to watch the walking dead, depending on the time of year.


----------



## sangs (Jan 1, 2003)

ncted said:


> The exceptions are still the sports fans, except the MLB fans who all seem very happy with MLB.com.


As a Mets fan living in Mets' territory, I can't watch Mets games on MLB.TV. I have to watch them on SNY, WPIX or whatever national network is broadcasting the game. Until that's an available option, cord-cutting never will be.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

sangs said:


> As a Mets fan living in Mets' territory, I can't watch Mets games on MLB.TV. I have to watch them on SNY, WPIX or whatever national network is broadcasting the game. Until that's an available option, cord-cutting never will be.


Queue the posts suggesting various proxy services...


----------

