Big Cable Is Bleeding: 500K+ Subscribers Lost In Q3

From Gigaom.com:

Big Cable Is Bleeding: 500K+ Subscribers Lost In Q3

Company3 Q Sub Losses
Comcast 275,000
Time Warner 155,000
Charter 63,800
Cablevision 24,500
Total 518,300

expecting users to pay $125 to $150 a month, and continuing to raise those rates 5 to 10 percent every year, isn’t a sustainable business model. At some point, those users will find alternative, cheaper ways of getting the content they want, and now there are plenty of ways to do so.

Here is another factor in the whole communications ecosystem.

"Commercial subscription revenue growth was due primarily to an increase in cell tower backhaul revenues..."

From: Time Warner Cable - Investor Relations - News Release

Question: Will taking bandwidth from broadcast TV help or hurt big cable? Can they make more money off of data and cell phone backhaul? They are infrastructure companies that have infrastructure that goes everywhere. On the other hand if the cell companies have more wireless backhaul capacity, will it take away from cable's backhaul revenues?

I don't know if the numbers reported in the Gigaom article are quite right. I think Comcast should be a 56,000 net loss and Charter at 22,000 net loss. Dish lost 29,000 customers.

But here is a missing data point DirecTV claims to have added 174,000 US customers.

http://investor.directv.com/released...leaseID=526989

So, my adjusted numbers give me a 112,500 loss of pay-TV subscribers. That doesn't include Cox, which is big in California. Since California is a prime OTA area, I could see them losing a lot.

But, what about Verizon FiOS and AT&T U-verse? Where are they in all this? Only after we get all the data will we know what the real story is.

I can't speak to Time Warner, but other service providers are losing basic subscribers but still gaining advanced and premium subscribers, therefore better fulfilling their fiduciary obligations. Dumping low profit customer that tie up limited capital, and dumping unprofitable customers, is a highly responsible and appropriate business approach.

Originally Posted by bicker

Blah, blah, fiduciary obligations, blah, business good, blah, business highly responsible, blah, humans bad.

always the same answer, whatever is in the best interest of big business, and government should not interfere. So, lets repeal the Americans with Disabilities Act. It only cuts into the profits of business, forcing them to make special accomadations for a small percentage of low profit customers. Closed captioning isn't free, you know.

Originally Posted by dkreichen1968

Here is another factor in the whole communications ecosystem.

"Commercial subscription revenue growth was due primarily to an increase in cell tower backhaul revenues..."

From: Time Warner Cable - Investor Relations - News Release

Question: Will taking bandwidth from broadcast TV help or hurt big cable? Can they make more money off of data and cell phone backhaul? They are infrastructure companies that have infrastructure that goes everywhere. On the other hand if the cell companies have more wireless backhaul capacity, will it take away from cable's backhaul revenues?

Thanks you. That makes more sense out of this article.
Commerce: Broadband Adoption Rising, But Divides Remain
Commerce: Broadband Adoption Rising, But Divides Remain - 2010-11-08 15:20:30 | Broadcasting & Cable
Quote “The full report was released the same day the NTIA was holding a forum on spectrum management and reclaiming government and other spectrum for use in wireless broadband. The government sees that as a way to speed adoption.”
But later in the article.
Quote “Cable operators are concerned the money could be used to overbuild existing service rather than extending it to un-served areas, where cable ops believe the government's priority should be.”

Cable operators are concerned the money could be used to overbuild existing service rather than extending it to un-served areas, where cable ops believe the government's priority should be.”

And this is exactly what will happen; It is already happening in many areas, in fact. While this may give some much needed competition to the current cable monopolies that exist in most areas, it does nothing to fulfill the objective of the National Broadband Initiative: To provide broadband to underseved and unserved areas.

Originally Posted by MrPogi

always the same answer, whatever is in the best interest of big business, and government should not interfere. So, lets repeal the Americans with Disabilities Act. It only cuts into the profits of business, forcing them to make special accomadations for a small percentage of low profit customers. Closed captioning isn't free, you know.

Cable TV is a luxury. ADA doesn't cover luxuries.

Originally Posted by bicker

I can't speak to Time Warner, but other service providers are losing basic subscribers but still gaining advanced and premium subscribers, therefore better fulfilling their fiduciary obligations. Dumping low profit customer that tie up limited capital, and dumping unprofitable customers, is a highly responsible and appropriate business approach......

With no regard to the original intent of TV broadcasting which was supposed to be about Emergency communications then, and according to the laws (That have not changed since they were written) they still are now. All you see is profit, dollars and investors and their "fiduciary obligations" to whom; more Rich people?.

Dumping low profit customer that tie up limited capital, and dumping unprofitable customers, is a highly irresponsible business approach, that shows their allegiance to the almighty dollar, and their cold halfheartedness to their loyal customers. Eat the rich!!

Sometimes the needs of all the populace has to override the greed of a few people or a handful of big companies. You are completely wrong on most all of your posts. This land still belongs to the people, and not to big business, even though they have controlled the direction of this country for about the last 25 years or so.

If Osama and the Democrats shellacking proves anything, it proves that even the Sheeple are waking up, and they do not like what they see. To hell with investors and their fiduciary obligations, and lets get back to what made this country great, and it wasn't fiduciary obligations to share holders or capitalist greed that got us where we are, it was plain old customer service and pride in the product or service that you sold, and not an allegiance to the almighty dollar.

Eat meat, it heals damaged brain cells !!

Originally Posted by n2rj

Cable TV is a luxury. ADA doesn't cover luxuries.

Depends on your point of view. If you're disabled, they aren't luxuries. But not many businesses enjoy being forced to pay for these things, and in a truly free market, few of those rules would be implemented by businesses.

If you want the government to give business free reign, there are consequences.

Even broadcast basic cable is not a necessity, but it is regulated as a public utility, at least it is in this state.

I don't think Government should give business completely free reign, but I have experience where the Government owns the power company, water company and phone company. In a word, it sucks. Phones out for a month at a time, water rationing, power outages and the Government seizing your property when you don't pay.

About the only thing that worked right was cable TV, which was privately owned and not heavily regulated.

Originally Posted by MrPogi

always the same answer

And always the same response from you and others. I outline actual reality, and responsibility, and you blather on blinded by what you want and what you wrongly claim you're entitled to.

Originally Posted by MrPogi

So, lets repeal the Americans with Disabilities Act. It only cuts into the profits of business, forcing them to make special accomadations for a small percentage of low profit customers. Closed captioning isn't free, you know.

When you can get the American people to consider your kind (television-heads?) a protected class, then you can assert the entitlement you're trying to assert in all your messages. Until then, accept the fact that your status as a television-head garners you no special rights or privileges.

Originally Posted by n2rj

Cable TV is a luxury. ADA doesn't cover luxuries.

Actually, that's not true, and not the issue. The issue is, as I mentioned, that the American people have designated disability as entitled to accommodation, as a matter of the consensus morality of our society. Access to even luxury public offerings is assured by the ADA.

Originally Posted by FOX TV

With no regard to the original intent of TV broadcasting which was supposed to be about Emergency communications then, and according to the laws (That have not changed since they were written) they still are now.

You're wrong. There is indeed regard: B1 service is regulated in most areas.

I think you think you know this industry, but clearly you don't. Clearly, all you know is electrical wiring. You don't know the business. You don't know cable. You don't know satellite. You don't know consumer marketing. You don't know the laws. You don't know regulatory process. You know practically nothing, and yet you try to make that accusation of me. I clearly know far more about this industry (the industry, not your self-centered wet-dream of how you want the industry to be) than you do - more that you are willing to allow yourself to know, because you fear the reality.

Originally Posted by FOX TV

All you see is profit, dollars and investors and their "fiduciary obligations" to whom; more Rich people?.

Get off your high horse. You belong on a little pony given what you understand about this industry and our society. What I see is all sides of the issues facing this industry, while you are utterly blinded by what affects you personally. You fear that your job will vanish. You fear that the kind of television you like will vanish. You have all these fears that are coloring your comments and preventing you from understanding anything you're trying to discuss.

Originally Posted by FOX TV

Dumping low profit customer that tie up limited capital, and dumping unprofitable customers, is a highly irresponsible business approach

No it isn't. That's a child's perspective.

Originally Posted by FOX TV

that shows their allegiance to the almighty dollar

No: It shows their maturity and responsibility in fulfilling their obligations, something that an emotional child wouldn't understand.

Originally Posted by FOX TV

and their cold halfheartedness to their loyal customers.

Loyal customers are those who are willing to pay a premium for what they want. That has nothing to do with anything you advocate. You're all about getting what you want for less money, not for a premium. You again show your ignorance about the real world.

Originally Posted by FOX TV

Eat the rich!!

More evidence that you think and speak as if a child.

Originally Posted by FOX TV

Sometimes the needs of all the populace has to override the greed of a few people or a handful of big companies.

Correct. That's exactly why the ADA exists. The difference is that you're trying to assert whatever you want as something that overrides what everyone else wants. That's not the case. Your blind avarice is without any merit whatsoever. The needs of the populace are very clearly outlined and fully and completely satisfied - over-satisfied actually. What you want is more than that - you want everything want, and you're asserting that you are entitled to it. Again, a childish perspective, totally devoid of understanding and acknowledgment that you live in a society with other people who have as much right to what they want as you do, and therefore you don't always get what you want, but instead those thing that are not a matter of society's consensus, like being fair to the disabled, are left to be address by free enterprise. That means you get what you want as long as you're willing to make providing it to you the very best use of the supplier's capital. That's what is fair, not your self-centered perspective.

Originally Posted by FOX TV

You are completely wrong on most all of your posts.

No, I'm completely right, and that's what you're afraid of. You post as if you're a spoiled child. Grow up.

Originally Posted by FOX TV

This land still belongs to the people, and not to big business, even though they have controlled the direction of this country for about the last 25 years or so.

Businesses are owned by people, and employ people, so that they can feed and clothe their families. Your lack of maturity perhaps has prevented you from realizing that your paycheck actually makes it to you only because of a business operating. Most people actually disagree with you. They just had an election (perhaps you missed it?) Guess which side of this discussion most of the voters supported? If you think they supported your side of this discussion then you're lying to yourself. Stop the self-deception and acknowledge the reality.

Originally Posted by FOX TV

If Osama and the Democrats shellacking proves anything

It proves that the pro-business political party won the election. You cannot be so blind as to miss that point.


Stop attacking me personally, Fox. It simply gives me permission to call you out on all your failings. If you stop attacking me, and let me have my say, while you have yours, and let the readers decide which makes more sense, then I won't attack you personally, in return.

Nice link with the story that provides more information...

Comcast Subscribers Flee as Cable Bills Increase: Video «

Comcast Cable president Neil Smit hedged on the reason for customers unsubscribing, saying that based on exit interviews, those former customers aren’t turning to Netflix or Hulu for their content, but instead turning to over-the-air signals — essentially plugging in digital rabbit ears — to access broadcast video content.

and

Those dropping pay TV subscriptions weren’t just basic cable subscribers; according to Comcast, 60 percent of those cord cutters were higher-value customers. That’s worrying news for Comcast, and could be for the cable industry in general.

Those dropping pay TV subscriptions weren’t just basic cable subscribers; according to Comcast, 60 percent of those cord cutters were higher-value customers. That’s worrying news for Comcast, and could be for the cable industry in general.

Kinda kicks the whole "dropping low profit and unprofittable customers" theory right in the ars.

And you sir, are simply an arsface, with nothing else needing to be said. " According to Comcast ", now there's a fine American company with a really good reputation for customer service..NOT !!!

No, I'm completely right, and that's what you're afraid of. You post as if you're a spoiled child. Grow up.

But does anyone know if they are replacing it with another option? For instance, I'm sure it's not safe to assume that they are switching to the free option ota. There is still no one talking about how easy it is to get the free dtv - in hd reception. It's up to us to spread this good news and so far no one's sharing. The marketers, sales, pr liars of the world aren't about to reveal the truth about free dtv.

For all the "communicating" going on, we still don't get it ... we are collectively a brainwashed, dumbed-down, thoughtless society of nitwits. I consider myself lucky and very fortunate to be living with a man who knows about wire, having worked in the telecom industry for 30 + years. Immediately he knew what the deal was when they started telling half truths at the beginning of the switch way back in 2/2008 when they only talked about these coupons for converter boxes.

I'm sitting here in front of the boob-tube with my silly rabbit ears trying to tune in my measly 2 channels but only getting snow. It was crazy and it got worse and worse as they weren't maintaining the old analog signal. I'd literally stood in front of my set adjusting and adjusting to no avail ... thank God the antenna arrived in the mail.

It was insane. And, worse yet, all my brainwashed neighbors are still paying ... It's not for lack of trying to tell them. They still look at me like I've got two heads. A few who did hear me at my grocery store and who went out and bought the useless antennas at Walmart or RadioShack are still having trouble and are insinuating that it's my fault. They did bother hearing the whole truth, that you need a very specific antenna. I tell them to call me when they get "no signal" and do they call? They do not! Very frustrating talking to brainwashed nitwits who think I'm lying to them. Idiots!


It's just to save money in this horrible economic depression. It more than likely is boiling down to choosing to pay one's mortgage or rent vs. the stupid and unnecessary cable bill. Reality is setting in for many; 'getting the vibe that it's not knowledge of of this need-to-know information about free dtv that causing them to discontinue their subscriptions.

Cable and satellite and everything PAY-TV - - - - SUCKS and is a total rip-off. Stop paying now. It's just plain stupid to pay when you can get it for free ota with a very specific set-up starting with an AMPLIFIED ANTENNA! If I can get the free 50+ channels ota, anyone in the states can. Damn, get with it people and quit all your idiotic bickering. They (Comcast especially!) are taking advantage of the collective ignorance of this still fairly new free technology. We need to tell one another the TRUTH. It going on 3 years now, how long will it take to start having real conversations about this? We need to stand united against these crooked people! Wake the hell up, they are benefiting from the infighting.

I try to tell the truth as the industry sees it,no matter how others see it. I couldn't care less what some think about the news as the industry reports it. I believe those who work in the industry and write articles, and actually contribute something of value, instead of egotistical people who have to show others how much they think they know...I feel sorry for them.