There Is No Such Thing As Cable Cord Cutters.

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#4
Must-have channels for consumers before they'll cut the pay-TV cord

ESPN can afford to be pretty cocky and keep its head buried in the sand: It's one of the few things you have to have cable or satellite to get, not counting the very limited ESPN3 you can get with an Xbox LIVE membership (and even then you're still paying)

Chart: Must-have channels for consumers before they'll cut the pay-TV cord

A survey of 300 multichannel users by Needham & Company found that only a handful of channels were considered "must-haves" by consumers before they'd consider cutting the cord. The top? The four broadcast channels that are available over the air, followed by ESPN and Discovery.

 

Aaron62

Contributor
Staff member
#5
If internet speeds keep increasing and bandwidth is widely available everywhere, what's to stop all of the independent cable channels from jumping ship and broadcasting directly to the internet.
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#6
One thing: People who value convenience. Even with a dedicated set-top-box for internet video, it's much easier to watch and channel surf with cable or satellite TV. Ask most non-tech saavy people...
 

Aaron62

Contributor
Staff member
#7
One thing: People who value convenience. Even with a dedicated set-top-box for internet video, it's much easier to watch and channel surf with cable or satellite TV. Ask most non-tech saavy people...
I think that will change with time. Look at when the internet started, it was much more complicated to access the internet back in the mid 90's than it is now.
 

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#8
Does anyone know why the CW chose to limit their demographic to teeny bopper girls? 8% "must have" isn't much. Our CWs pull in most of their viewers with syndication, not network programming.
 
Last edited:

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#9
I think that will change with time. Look at when the internet started, it was much more complicated to access the internet back in the mid 90's than it is now.
All it will take is a well marketed Media Center computer that gives people DVR and streaming capabilities in one easy to use package. If it had a remote, like people are accustomed to, it would sell like hot cakes, and MCV would ultimately die the death.
 

n2rj

Moderator
Staff member
#11
If internet speeds keep increasing and bandwidth is widely available everywhere, what's to stop all of the independent cable channels from jumping ship and broadcasting directly to the internet.
Retransmission fees paid by the cableco as well as nielsen ratings which determine ad rates.

Despite what people thing about the "cord cutting revolution" I don't think that the channels are going to allow it. It will cannibalize their revenue stream.
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#12
Does anyone know why the CW chose to limit their demographic to teeny bopper girls? 8% "must have" isn't much. Our CWs pull in most of their viewers with syndication, not network programming.
Ask my teenage daughter. "Vampire Diaries". We can't get CW OTA yet, and she HAS to have it. Internet only for that show. (I hide in the other room while she watches it!)

I think it was a smart move on the CW's part to target teen girls. Do you know how much money a teenage girl can spend? Yet, I'm sure nobody asked them if they could live without the CW.
 

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#13
Retransmission fees paid by the cableco as well as nielsen ratings which determine ad rates.

Despite what people thing about the "cord cutting revolution" I don't think that the channels are going to allow it. It will cannibalize their revenue stream.
It's a lot easyier to get viewing data from the internet than from Nielson anyway. Many web content providers charge for advertising per view. Also, they can collect data on the location or the particular persons account. (i.e. the Peak Kia ads that pop up on YouTube)
 

n2rj

Moderator
Staff member
#14
You would think so but that isn't the case. Web metrics aren't simply a matter of counting who visits. Plus with on demand content there's no real way to measure your audience for a particular show and time slot.

Internet delivery isn't going to be as profitable as traditional delivery. That's just hard facts.
 

Chips

DTVUSA Member
#17
Lol, great picture. I want to see OTA survive and cable get more reasonable, but I suspect they will win as far as limiting free video content on the WEB. To give an example, how many people tried Dialpad or some other free Internet phone service, many of us use that service for free with only a dial-up connection. The idea was that the advertising on the site would pay for a phone call. How many free phone service via the web allow you to make free phone calls to a telephone today? As for add revenue from the Internet, how many newspapers make enough money from their web sites to be profitable? Dialpad help with perfecting computers for phone gateways, but not much more. The current free offers of video via Hulu and the networks have perfected streaming video, but how long they will offer it for free or for add base revenue? Time will tell.
 

n2rj

Moderator
Staff member
#18
VOIP services are an example of how the internet changed an industry. But it does prove that it's not going to be a dramatic shift from an overly expensive service to an almost free service. It's somewhere in the middle now, with VOIP still being lower cost than POTS but not exactly free. Most people are ditching their landlines for cell service anyway, which is still run by the same companies that sell wireline service.
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#19
ditching their landlines for cell service anyway, which is still run by the same companies that sell wireline service.
And most cell phone plans cost the same or way more than a POTS line, anyway. Add to that the fact that most families need a cell at home 24/7 and at least one "mobile" cell phone.

We get by with 2 prepaid phones and a MagicJack. My teenager has her own phone, she pays for it. Magic jack has been having issues lately with not paing certain teleco's interconnect fees though, and you get a busy signal when you call one of those exchanges. The FCC has been made aware of it, but in the usual FCC fashion, nothing will come of it.
 

n2rj

Moderator
Staff member
#20
We have two smartphones (iPhones) and my wife and I also have work issued blackberries. We also have VOIP service from CallCentric. Works pretty good.

We mostly use the iPhones.
 
Top