Pay TV’s Pain Point Gets Worse: Cord-Cutting Sped Up in 2016

Comcast Xfinity Stream App
AP/REX/Shutterstock

The cord-cutting storm continues to gather momentum, and the forecast is bad news for traditional cable, satellite and telco TV operators — and their programming suppliers.

U.S. pay-TV providers lost around 1.9 million subscribers last year, according to the latest research from Kagan, a unit of S&P Global Market Intelligence. Meanwhile, “virtual” pay-TV services delivered over the internet like Dish’s Sling TV and AT&T’s DirecTV Now didn’t help stop the overall sector from shrinking in 2016.

Over-the-top TV providers gained about 900,000 subscribers last year, rising from approximately 600,000 at year-end 2015 to 1.5 million at the end of 2016, per Kagan estimates. The majority of those subscribers are attributed to Sling TV, Sony PlayStation Vue and DirecTV Now but encompass all OTT linear and on-demand services.

While the gains on the OTT front would appear to be good news for cable programmers, the problem is that many broadband-targeted TV packages are stripped-down “skinny bundles” that omit many of the channels included in traditional basic cable lineup.

Google’s recently launched YouTube TV, for example, excludes big chunks of the cable universe, including Discovery, Turner, HBO, Scripps Networks Interactive and A&E. (AMC Networks is the only basic-cable group in the YouTube TV mix.)

Overall, Kagan tallied 94.7 million residential pay-TV subscribers in the U.S. as of the end of 2016, down 2% from 96.6 million a year earlier. That decline of 1.9 million is substantially worse than the drop of 1.1 million in 2015 across American pay-TV providers, according to the research firm’s estimates.

At the same time, American broadband-only homes grew much faster in 2016 — increasing by more than 2 million. Kagan estimated the U.S. had 15.4 million non-multichannel broadband homes at the end of last year, up from 13.3 million end of 2015. That suggest that 13% of the country’s occupied households make the decision not to take a traditional multichannel TV package.

And broadband-only households are expected to nearly double over a five-year period, according to Kagan, which forecasts 28 million non-multichannel broadband homes by 2021. And that projection could end up being conservative, given the speed at which cord-cutting has accelerated in just the last year.

The pay-TV industry already is trying to brace for the worsening whirlwind as more consumers are poised to cut off traditional satellite and cable TV service.

Dish and DirecTV have already planted their OTT flags. Now Comcast is planning to launch the Xfinity Instant TV “skinny bundle” across its U.S. footprint in the third quarter of 2017.

Comcast’s Xfinity Instant TV (which will require subs to have Comcast broadband service) will start at $15 per month with broadcast networks as well as HBO or possibly another premium channel. That’s designed to give the cable giant’s an answer to cheap OTT alternatives. And while Comcast’s real hope is that it provides an on-ramp to full-blown “fat bundle” pay TV, at this point that may be wishful thinking.

Pictured above: Comcast’s new Xfinity Stream app, released in February, for letting TV subscribers stream programming in and outside their homes.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 10

Leave a Reply

10 Comments

Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Jacques Strappe says:

    My monopoly broadband and cable provider has been really jacking up high speed broadband prices and aggressively pushing things like their “blast” technology which we are told is needed to stream video content effectively. No wonder the cable/broadband monopoly giants are as detested as the airlines with all their extraneous fees added to their non-existent customer service. I absolutely loathe Comcast. Their customer service is atrociously bad and even their broadband service goes down often in my area in spite of their claims of reliability. The cost of just Comcast high speed broadband is now around $100/ month and increasing all the time. This is my highest annual utility cost by far. Broadband is an absolute required utility in every home nowadays.

    • Anthony K says:

      That is wild! I have no choice but to pick up Comcast for internet and I had a feeling they would be jacking up the prices for customers who are only interested in their internet. Upset, but I am not all that surprised honestly.

  2. Skip Plummer says:

    It’s kind of a zero-point situation… it had to come to this sooner or later. I have had next to no interest in the latest and greatest productions put out there by the trditional TV sources for many years now. The “series” have had nothing new to offer practically since I was a kid… I’m in my later 60’s at this point. The way that I see it, if they’re starving for funding to continue with the same old pablum, that is their problem and in no way mine.

  3. Maxly says:

    Correction: YouTube TV does not currently offer HBO, although Showtime is available as an add-on subscription.

  4. DAL says:

    I think you missed the point with your quote ” the problem is that many broadband-targeted TV packages are stripped-down “skinny bundles” that omit many of the channels included in traditional basic cable lineup.” The very reason we cable cutters jumped. We DON’T WANT THOSE CHANNELS.
    It doesn’t matter they offered over 200 channels. If you only watch 5-10 channels, why pay for the junk forced on you?

  5. Brian Lipari says:

    I cut the cord seven years ago and never looked back. Paying over $100 a month for less than ten channels that I watched, shows are over 1/3 commercials, annoying channel logos/graphics, channels repeat same content all week, and infomericals run basically from midnight to sunrise. Complete waste of money. With the money I save, I can buy any series I want to watch.

  6. Dunstan says:

    There’s simply no reason to pay for television; everything is available online for free. That said, I’ll never watch movies that way. The theater experience is singular.

    • Except, this method of thinking offers ZERO to the help the continued creation of “everything available”.

      What incentive does a company, network, studio, production company, director, producer, writer or actor have to create anything for people to endlessly consume, if there is no profit to be gained from it to justify its existence?

      The reason to pay for television (in any method that is available) is so that there can continue to be television to enjoy. Simple as that.

More Digital News from Variety

Loading