4 ms·
Exactly. If anything I'd bet the opposite might be the case. After all, Netflix streaming and Hulu have both been an enabler for a lot of folks to drop their ca
by enjo 16y ago
Exactly. If anything I'd bet the opposite might be the case. After all, Netflix streaming and Hulu have both been an enabler for a lot of folks to drop their cable subscription altogether(my wife and I have, for one).
The only problem is that there are still a few shows we really want to see (like Game Of Thrones) that we can't find a way to legally acquire. Without cable there is no HBO.
I bet more and more people are going to be turning to piracy to get the content they want when they cut that cable cord.
- sudonim 16y agoHBO on a cable subscription is still 15 - 20 clams. Even if it was available streaming or unbundled, that's still a lot more than the cost of netflix.
- sukuriant 16y agoBut I'd be much faster to pay 15-20 than 65+(15 to 20)=80+ and watch 5 channels + HBO.
- robryan 16y agoI think cable misses an opportunity by forcing you to have a heap of channels you don't want just to get the stuff you do. I'd pay somewhere around $20 a month to get the probably 5 or so channels of any interest.
- MatthewPhillips 16y agoSo.. what opportunity are they missing? The opportunity to get less money from their customers? Doesn't sound like much of an opportunity to me.
- yalurker 16y agoThe opportunity is that they could have more customers. Many people are canceling their cable subscriptions because the price is too high for the value it offers. If cable companies allowed customers to have only a few channels that they cared about for a lower fee, many of these people would keep some level of cable subscription.