Study: One in Five Netflix Subscribes Bypass Cable for Streaming
Study: One in Five Netflix Subscribes Bypass Cable for Streaming
Posted 09/20/2010 at 6:40am
| by Paul Lilly
11
Comments
Print
Take note cable companies, more than a third of Netflix subscribers aged 25 to 34 have chosen the online movie rental's streaming service over pay television. That's according to a new survey by Credit Suisse, which also found that about 30 percent of Netflix's subscribers aged 18 to 24 made the same decision.
"Netflix's low cost, subscription streaming service (with improving content) is our biggest worry and could become 'good enough' for consumers with moderate income and TV usage to use as a substitute for pay TV," said Credit Suisse's Spencer Wang.
The survey only pinged 250 Netflix subscribers, but initial findings should be cause for concern for cable operators. According to the survey, 17 percent, or almost one in five, of Netflix subscribers of all ages and incomes have migrated to Netflix's streaming service in place of cable TV.
"In the near term, we submit that Big Media has a small window of opportunity to control its own destiny," said Credit Suisse. "The major U.S. entertainment conglomerates control 70 percent of all TV viewing through its various broadcast, basic cable, and premium TV networks and channels. And, content remains the lifeblood for distribution systems."
More like this
11
Comments
Comments are closed on this article
reutnes
September 20, 2010 at 2:04pm
People who aren't 24-32 are also jumping the shark. My roommate and I are just splitting the cost of a netflix subscription instead of shelling out for cable. We used to pay around $120 for basic cable and internet, now we just pay for the internet. Between netflix and what's free on hulu, we're getting by just fine. I told the comcast CSR we were canceling due to the recent rate hikes and she tried to offer us extremely cheap service to get us to stay, but the damage was done.
Obsidian
September 20, 2010 at 12:49pm
Comcast in Minnesota has been hiking rates every year for no increase in service on the TV side of the equation. Just this year they figured out another way to extort money from consumers by once again requiring a digital cable box at every TV even though my TV was quite capable of decoding those signals before.
Like every good MPC’er I built my own DVR, I refuse to pay for the crap the cable company is slinging. So when the digital tuners came out I was forced to make the choice of going without extended cable channels or paying for 4 Comcast-owned, and customer-rented digital tuners just to sit in-line to each tuner in my DVR box.
I left the expensive ‘extended basic cable’ service and just went with the most basic package I could get for $9.
I thought I’d miss SciFi and the History Channel, but now I get that content online. It’s not the same night the show was on, but I don’t care any more.
The thing that worries me is that Comcast was smart enough to get legislation through that says they only have to deliver 250GB / month of content then they reserve the right to shut you off. I’m not hitting that limit yet, but it’s not a stretch to think that it’ll be quite possible in the not so distant future. Comcast has also been caught and fined for throttling bandwidth to certain traffic. It’s a matter of time before they do this to their competitor Netflix.
I look forward to channels a-la-carte and/or TV-programs the same way. I’d pay for HULU if it would give me ALL the shows I wanted to watch. Due to licensing agreements the industry shows no sign of adapting to this more flexible model of content delivery.
Move over RIAA ... there’s a new dinosaur in town.
Biceps
September 20, 2010 at 12:27pm
That instead of responding to this study by actively trying to improve their consistently awful, mind-numbing content, that cable providors will instead band together to try to collectively destroy netflix?
samduhman
September 20, 2010 at 10:18am
Thier greed will cost them if they don't change thier ways just like it cost Blockbuster. Comcast gets me for approx $130 a month for extended digital basic (no movie channels) and internet. I've been tossing around the idea of getting rid of the tv portion and just keeping internet.
JohnP
September 20, 2010 at 12:13pm
If I did not have a son who watches a lot of cable TV, I would completely ditch cable, HD channels, Dvr and all in a heartbeat. I have not watched a cable TV show in over a year.
Slugbait
September 20, 2010 at 1:06pm
My son is almost 4, and Disney is the only cable channel we let him (occassionally) watch. Otherwise, he watches PBS or approved movies the majority of what time we allow for TV usage.
After which, I agree...the only cable show I watch now (ok, DVR, I almost never "watch" anymore) is Eureka. And Comcast just bumped us back to $60 for Expanded Basic, and they don't want to give us the "customer retention" deal for a sixth year in a row. We have to pay $60 a month for SD-exclusive service with no premium channels?
So after getting my plasma a couple of months ago, other than Eureka I'm only recording OTA HD via my DIY antenna. The last couple of nights, I've been watching the 1080p stream of Enterprise from tv.com (Flash doesn't look "pristine", but still vastly superior to SD on Comcast cable). Thinking very hard about putting the antenna in the attic, plugging it into the splitter, and dumping the outrageous Comcast cost...even if we got HD channels in the package, $60 is still a steep price...but SD-only for $60/mo makes me want to puke.
The only issue left before saying goodbye to Comcast is upgrading the other two TVs, getting DTAs for them, or go exclusively with broadband thru my other HTPC and skip broadcast TV...hmmm.
Jasker
September 20, 2010 at 8:07am
I pay for the lowest cable TV teir. It lets me watch football on the over the air channels and some stuff for the kids. Costs like $15.
Slugbait
September 20, 2010 at 12:29pm
The Comcast "bottom tier" package in my area doesn't include ESPN (or any channel above 29), so I don't think you're watching MNF (except for the nights that your local team is playing).
stige
September 20, 2010 at 7:44am
the only hitch is that a as Netflix grows it's content library it is going to be trying/asking for permission to stream shows from the very people it's putting out of business. what happens when they realize that and just say "no"?
i would be ecstatic if 'big cable' went the way of the record labels. most of the shows on TV are absolute garbage, anyways.
i wasn't a part of the survey but count me as part of that 20%. in stead of $80 a month just for cable from Comcast (after their promo period) i just pay $40 for internet. the only thing i miss is the DVR, but i foresee a tivo in my near future.
eikichi
September 20, 2010 at 7:04am
The cable companies lost me as a subscriber at least 4 years ago. They should have switched to an á la carte model years ago in order to retain customers. At this point I don't even know if that could lure me back.
Cable customers are going to continue to dwindle as services like Hulu, Netflix, and Redbox continue to improve and add more content. Cable companies better hope that nothing comes along to supplant cable internet service, otherwise they'll really be in trouble.
Connect with MaximumPC
Featured Content
The gang discusses the GTX 690, Trinity, Ivy Bridge, Amazon, big-box stores, MMOs,...
This month's issue
Feature
Build a PC On Any Budget
Feature
Cloud Services Showdown
How-To
Encrypt Your External Drive
Build It
Upgrade an X58 Rig
Most Commented Articles
Latest Max PC Tweets
- maximumpc: Original RickRoll Video Returns to YouTube After 24-Hour Copyright Hiatus http://t.co/MaH9Sxyy2 days 3 hours ago
- maximumpc: Corsair has decided not to go forward with its $78 million IPO, citing weak equity market conditions http://t.co/A5a4DAzj2 days 3 hours ago
- maximumpc: Want to work at Maximum PC? Our Online Managing Editor, Alex, is moving away, so we need a new one. http://t.co/9Z7JCh0E4 days 1 hour ago
