Cablevision jumps 10% over 2 days for cord cutting package

[Breand]

Cablevision is being proactive with cord cutting. Pretty amazing deal:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.optimum.com/tv/digital-antenna.jsp">http://www.optimum.com/tv/digital-antenna.jsp</a><!-- m -->

$35 a month for broadband, they give you an HD antenna, and you get Freewheel service for free after phone purchase. (Freewheel is a wi-fi only phone)

[Grieve]

I think it's a bit of stretch to call that a cord cutting package. Giving you a digital antenna isn't really saying much, since you can get one for under $20 on Amazon. Now...if they helped you hook it up to feed all your cable outlets around the house that would be useful.

And "faster than DSL" doesn't inspire much either.

I think cable TV will be dead pretty soon, with the flood of streaming packages coming out. The rumored Apple service being revealed at WWDC will likely be the final nail in the coffin.

Of course, the cable companies will do just fine providing the pipes to feed the streaming...at least until Google Fiber/municipal Wifi turns up everywhere.

[Vanraw]

They are all heading there.

Verizon is the latest provider to introduce a so-called slim TV bundle, offering more than 150 digital TV channels starting at $55 per month. It joins offerings including Cox Communications' $39 TV Economy bundle of 100-plus channels and Time Warner Cable's $30 Starter TV with HBO, which (hence the name) offers 20-plus channels and HBO Go access.


Verizon's offering may not be a done deal—ESPN, Fox Sports and NBCUniversal have all claimed the new service violates their contract agreements. (NBCUniversal is CNBC's parent company.) But Verizon has said they believe they are within their rights to launch the offering.

I find it funny the networks are freaking out.

[Breand]

They are all heading there.

Verizon is the latest provider to introduce a so-called slim TV bundle, offering more than 150 digital TV channels starting at $55 per month. It joins offerings including Cox Communications' $39 TV Economy bundle of 100-plus channels and Time Warner Cable's $30 Starter TV with HBO, which (hence the name) offers 20-plus channels and HBO Go access.


Verizon's offering may not be a done deal—ESPN, Fox Sports and NBCUniversal have all claimed the new service violates their contract agreements. (NBCUniversal is CNBC's parent company.) But Verizon has said they believe they are within their rights to launch the offering.

I find it funny the networks are freaking out.

Cable going the way the market is heading is making the content providers freak the hell out. ESPN gets something like $7.50 per subscriber. They would lose their shirts if cable went ala carte or speed up cord cutting by making offers like this. Even all of the smaller providers; one of these channels will exist in the future because they can't survive without per subscriber fees. Who gives a crap about channels like Cloo TV? The market will see a massive consolidation of channels. And yes, cable will be just fine as they will provide the backbone.

[Vanraw]

And yes, cable will be just fine as they will provide the backbone.

Well not really... Cable just does the last mile. But yea the broadband pipe is going to continue. However Cable will lose a great deal revenue with the cutting of the cord. This is really what they are trying to delay by allowing for smaller channel packages.

For cable providers, the big money is ion the triple play. The Cable portion and the voice portion are both under legitimate attack.

[Breand]

And yes, cable will be just fine as they will provide the backbone.

Well not really... Cable just does the last mile. But yea the broadband pipe is going to continue. However Cable will lose a great deal revenue with the cutting of the cord. This is really what they are trying to delay by allowing for smaller channel packages.

For cable providers, the big money is ion the triple play. The Cable portion and the voice portion are both under legitimate attack.

I disagree. Phone costs next to nothing for cable providers. It's all built in to the broadband service. The vast majority of the cable bill goes to content provider fees. That's why the cable bill is always going up but broadband and phone service have stayed the same for years. If cable can basically get double the amount of money per subscriber for broadband...say $80 a month, they wouldn't need the revenue from phone and cable.

[Jakensama]

ESPN gets something like $7.50 per subscriber.

Probably since it is basically the only reason to get cable.

[Breand]

I never watch ESPN. It's the Football and Basketball channel of which I have no interest in either. There is no way cable gets the benefit of carrying them with what they pay per subscriber. It's all on ESPN so they are scared to death of the consolidation and end of cable. They will not come close to generating the same amount of revenue if they have to go to a subscription model.

Only reason for cable to me is AMC, HBO and Showtime.

[Jakensama]

Sports are the only thing I can't torrent, and the live streams suck..

[Slamz]

Sports are the only thing I can't torrent, and the live streams suck..

Then the question probably becomes "are you willing to pay $10-$15/month for just ESPN".

If so then ala carte may work out fine. ESPN will get their money from people who actually want ESPN and are willing to pay that much for it, and everyone else can have a lower cable bill by not having to pay into ESPN.

Let each channel stand on their own merit and charge what they think they can get.

[Breand]

But what does ESPN show live sports wise that makes it worth it? Monday Night Football? My wife would want it during tennis tournaments. What else? ESPN is just a bunch of news and talk shows, very little live sports of any merit.

ESPN would lose a massive amount of revenue with a $10-15 pay service. They already get something around $7.50 per cable subscriber. What percent of those cable subscribers would sign up for the service....20%? And what happens to commercials in a subscription service? HBO/Netflix/Sirius(mostly) don't have commercials. That along with costs in providing and up keeping the service would be a huge loss for them.

[Jakensama]

ESPN and their affiliate networks shows college football, thats pretty big for people who don't live in the NE where all the college football teams suck. Along with sportscenter and their various other programs, they have a pretty big base - theres a reason they command so much money from the companys.

But they would have to have a pretty sexy sports package to go independent, maybe they could do a good offering with all of their various affilites (big 10 network, longhorn network, etc, espn2/3, espnU, etc.).

You can keep commercials in a subscription service, especially if you are showing live sports where there are commercial breaks.

[Slamz]

Yeah, really what happens is whatever the market justifies. If people are willing to pay $30/month for ESPN and watch commercials on top of that, then I guess that's what it's worth. The painful part for ESPN would probably be figuring out what that price point is.