BUNDLED CABLE DEATH WATCH: Q2 CORD-CUTTING SOARS TO 566,000

Breitbart ^ | Aug 11, 2015 | John Nolte

[bkopto]

Meanwhile, for around $100 a month pay TV is not only pummeling you with about 20 minutes of ads an hour, but forcing you to pay for a ton of networks you hate. Moreover, many of these networks get a chunk of your cable bill. Even if you don’t watch left-wing CNN and MSNBC, if they are on your package, chances are a part of your bill is going directly to both.

If you want to put CNN, MSNBC, MTV, and all these other low-rated, left-wing networks out of business, not watching them makes absolutely no difference.

You have to cut the cord.

Nearly half of CNN’s revenue comes from this immoral revenue stream. CNN is taking your money to attack you all day every day.

And that is the great con the gigantic left-wing multinationals have pulled off for decades. Something like 100 million homes keep hundreds of networks profitable by forcing those customers into overpriced cable packages. Maybe 15 cable networks could survive solely on ad revenue generated by actual eyeballs. The rest would go poof, and good riddance.

SNIP

The death of the pay TV cable bundle is the healthiest thing that could ever happen to your pocketbook or our culture.

Cut the cord.

For America.

[SkyDancer]

Same here. Went there but no request for a CC. Watched a bit of footie from Hungary just to see ... worked just fine.

[goodwithagun]

The only reason we don’t is sports. We are sports fans, especially college football, and we rarely watch tv other than that. If I could get NFL, NCAA football and baseball, plus sports highlights ESPN style I’d pry the dish off the side of my house right now.

[prisoner6]

Bottom line is you can cut the cable, the bundling, and just get what you want OTA or via internet devices like Roku, Amazon and such.

If you are in a good reception area, good for you. You WILL get a nice selection of channels. If you are behind a hill, outside the range...then not so much and you will need a pretty fast internet connection which will cost money.

Essentially everything will become PPV. Net connection $, channels you want more $ per channel.

So let’s say you take a $30/month net connection, then Netflix, Amazon at IIRC $10 each per month, and now add in Hulu and few other net channels which may or may not netcast in delay or segments. That’s another $5 - whatever you subscribe to per month.

Easily $75+ per month. Plus does that include the costs of devices like Roku or a DVR?

If that works for you fine. Doesn’t work for me.

FWIW Frank Gifford a long time ago said everything would be PPV. Want to watch an NFL game? Pay for each game - $$$ - or buy a package that includes games you may not want.

[Ciexyz]

I have an antenna that looks like a closed laptop, you attach it by one cord to your HDTV and plug the antenna plug into the wall socket. (Your TV also plugs into the wall.) You stick the antenna against the inside of your nearest window to improve reception. That's all the techie stuff you need to know.)

I get all the major channels including the local religious channels, PBS, and a bunch of retro channels. All major broadcast channels are required to have a substation which is retro TV programming, that won't change - even if some of the retro channels we have now get sold off, as one poster suggested might happen. Another one will pop up to replace it.

Occasionally with overcast skies, maybe one of the channels doesn't work, because of atmospheric interference. but the other channels will work.

[ELS]

One thing I didn’t realize I’d enjoy so much, is being able to see YouTube on the big television screen ;-)

Yup! I watched a recording of the "debate" on Roku's YouTube channel since I wasn't able to watch it in real time. Didn't have to watch any commercials. A lot of TV shows that I can't find on Netflix or Hulu Plus, I am able to find on YouTube.

[VerySadAmerican]

I got an antennae a while back and the TV we watch is true HD. We’ve got more TV than we can watch. And it was fun to tell them to stick it.

I still have Comcast cable for $53 a month. I haven’t been able to find a cable provider in my neighborhood. I’m am looking.

Thanks for the vipbox.tv for sports. Is the address www.vipbox.tv?

[bkopto]

Is the address www.vipbox.tv?

Yes. You could also google "vipbox" and find it there.

[magglepuss]

One more thing, if you have a wii, you can use that to stream netflix.

[TomGuy]

Get an antenna for your local TV

That option does not necessarily help. I live far enough away from broadcasts that I could pick up maybe 3 channels.

Broadcast signals have weakened significantly with the increase in cable & satellite TV.

I live in an apartment complex, so only an indoor antenna is a viable option. Again, I might pick up 3 channels.

Internet has a massive amount of material. Notice, however, that more and more network websites that have full episodes or events also require viewers to log in through their provider (satellite or cable). No provider, no access.

Netflix and Amazon Prime are excellent alternatives. I usually watch more via Netflix in any given week than I do watching cable TV.

[zencycler]

Decades ago I temporarily cancelled cable for about the same reason (general depravity exposure) - until my kids got into their late teens. Then I brought it back, and then, as mentioned, cancelled again 10 years ago.

[Rennes Templar]

For free live sports, I use Stream2Watch.co. Good quality streams.

AdBlocker make it easier.

[Jamestown1630]

While it does require giving up certain things, you actually gain stuff. (I think if one is a real sports fanatic, there’s a problem though. We’re not; we generally only watch the Superbowl, and mainly for the commercials ;-)

Also, if you live in a ‘dead zone’ for OTA, you might sacrifice more; but where we are, a simple indoor “Leaf” antenna is bringing in all we need for local news, and local Public Television.

The big difference is that we were paying about $205 per month; and now it’s about $75 for everything we have.

-JT

[Hawthorn]

>> I have a couple of local stations about 70 miles to my NNE and a bunch to my S at about 70 miles. <<

Unless the path from your abode to the stations runs along a coast line, and unless maybe you have a parabolic seven-foot UHF dish on a 60’ tower, plus a low-noise preamp mounted near the antenna, you’re not likely to have much reception.

Oh, and don’t forget a rotator.

[mylife]

I have been on antenna and broadband internet for a year and a half.

The content is far better, though I had to struggle to see the FOX GOP debate, but OI saw it live.

Effem! Cable is dead! Cut The cord!

[mylife]

Kodi

[mylife]

65 miles is about the norm for crystal clear picture

[Impy]

I watch streams of UFC PPVs.

I support piracy but it is technically illegal.

[Impy]

These sites have tons of spam pop ups (and sometimes redirects, very annoying), that’s probably what you saw.

If you’re on a site that actually requires you to pay, find another.

[Swanks]

Two sites. TVFool.com [figure out distance, direction to tower[s].

Solidsignal.com [if they don't have it..you don't need it].

I get ABCNBCCBSFOXPBS. Time Warner wants to offer that for $10, I get it off the air. ROKU..to Amazon Prime and Netflix.

I'm up $100 a month and have better content I an see WHEN I want to see, not when TWC decides when I should see it. Not that they have any content of value anyway

[Hawthorn]

>> 65 miles is about the norm for crystal clear picture <<

Two things to say about your statement:

1. 99% of the time, the picture from a digital signal is either (a) crystal clear or (b) totally absent. There are no “in between” pictures like we used to have with analog signals.

2. 65 miles is an exceptional range. Almost nobody will have consistently good reception at that distance, unless (a) they live somewhere like the top of a mountain; or unless (b) their antenna is on a very tall tower, with flat terrain between their tower and the TV station.

(And by the way, I’ve been a TV-DXer since 1952. But digital TV has almost ruined the hobby.)