Comments on: You don't need satellite TV when times get tough

An Oakland, Calif., family knew they had to trim monthly expenses. So they took a novel, Internet-savvy approach to cutting costs while still watching their favorite programs.

[icolbowca]

In my opinion they went about this all wrong... I pay $53/month for Directv, I've got the HD package, 2 x boxes, and all of the channels (note: I only have HBO and Cinemax for 6/months). And I payed nothing extra like installation fees or whatever. Then for $45 (I think...) I get cable internet with Comcast... their 2nd to fastest service (no contract).

If you haggle enough you can get a pretty good package from the cable and internet providers.

The only thing that I would agree with in all this... at the end of the day, I know I am wasting $$$, because I honestly don't need the television, and I could make do without the internet (given that I could steal off of someone's Wifi or revert to work for essentials).

[keepntabs]

I appears that you are a very good haggler, and were able to find a level of service that you feel comfortable paying for. But I am very pleased with the direction we took. Besides the significant savings that we see every month, we are not tied to a subscription contract, and we don't have misgivings about not using all of the service that we were paying for. I don't think that you are wasting money, because you enjoy watching television and using the Internet, and those activities have a certain value that you are willing to pay for.

I highly suggest that you suggest that you share your haggling methods.

[CanadianGeezer]

One can appreciate why satellite TV is among the first cuts in an economic downturn ... The reality is the failure of the satellite service providers to offer realistic competitive 'packages'. The missus and I pay $59.95 for our package and even at that it is not really worth it and will likely be discontinued as the economy falters.

[steve4lee]

For picture quality, over-the-air HD beats cable and satellite HD, which need further video compression than broadcast for bandwidth's sake. Whether you can tell the difference depends upon how much compression they use on that channel, the size of your TV, how far you sit from the picture, etc. The program material matters, too, with animation often being the most demanding.

[davetitle]

Funny, just wrote a whole post about my own experiences dumping Time Warner Cable for a combination of internet and over-the-air HD - check it out here: http://mymediamusings.com/2008/12/22/cutting-the-cable-how-i-canceled-my-cable-saved-1000yr-and-still-get-tv/

[ny2nv]

I have HD cable DVR (no premium channels), with high speed internet, and phone, total cost 150 a month. I don't go to the movies or eat out. Have a pay as you cell phone, cost 10 a month if that.
I live in a small town. Rent an apt in a large house on an acre of land.
Next to my rent, cable is my biggest expense.
FYI my apartment has no phone lines so cable is a blessing.

[bigmc6000]

It's not that you don't need satellite, it's that you don't need that freakin' crazy expensive package. I can't say they are at all bargain hunters if they were stupid enough to get the $115 package in the first place. So, great, they are now saving $93 a month but what about the fact that there were wasting at least $30 a month for the premium channels when the 240's are chock full of movies all the time...

So, in summary, now they aren't as stupid but they are also missing out on tons of good programming (240's, ESPN, Big Ten Network) that can't be seen on the internet.

Oh, and 1 last thing, you aren't SAVING anything if you spend it on other stuff you wouldn't have needed in the first place...

[NeuroticNomad]

Times are tough. We?re all looking for ways to cut spending. After looking at my cable bill, I decided (with zero research and zero preparation) to see if my wife and I could live without television for 52 weeks, relying solely on the internet.

Two TV Junkies under one roof can consume a remarkable amount of programming content. If there?s one thing I?ve learned, it?s that there is no silver bullet one-size-fits-all solution to replacing television with the internet. We watch a mixture of streamed shows and downloads.

After a bit of a learning curve we?re up to speed and have not missed a single show. Election night was a bit tense, but I didn?t miss a beat. Plus, we?ve saved $250 in five months. Best of all, my setup has passed The Wife Test (your milage may vary).

See my numbers @ http://replacetelevision.wordpress.com/why-switch/

http://replacetelevision.wordpress.com/2008/12/24/how-to-drop-cable-and-satellite-and-still-watch-everything-part-1-streaming/

[Tinman52]

... <3 Cnet articles. Let's just start with the $600 for the new computer that was excluded from the $93/mo and see what the time line for savings looks like.

[TowerTone]

For those of you who think a la carte will lower your prices drastically, you are wrong. Initially, if it is ever forced to be offered, many people will cut out channels they don't want. However, when it comes time for your local cable company or satellite TV provider to negotiate retransmit prices, they will have to pay MORE per channel than now, because HBO and others sell cheaper in bulk, so that the fewer people actually paying for a channel, the more the system has to pay for that channel. That is why basic channels are so cheap, because so many people have them, and the potential for more ad revenue is there.

Another pricing scheme to keep in mind is basic distribution. Even if farmers are giving their cow's milk away, it still has to be processed, shipped, and stored. Same with gas or any other product. The cost of maintaining a cable system does NOT go down with less viewership. It still has the same amount of 'plant' to keep up, from the tower and satellite dishes, the buildings and equipment, and the actual miles of cable. So the less they make off of video revenue, the more they will have to make from internet or phone to maintain that system.

In other words, anyone that thinks you can get 10 MBPS down and drop all you video and even phone will eventually have to pay more for the internet to keep it going.

TINSTAAFL

[macdad614]

Since we rarely use Comcast's On Demand, I was thinking about dropping that from the 'package' which is Digital Basic (metro Atlanta). However, now Comcast is planning to transform to a required digital cable box for ALL TVs on the cable - tune to channel 3 and forget about using the TV's remote that has all the features.

Now I am considering dropping cable TV totally. I do not appreciate the monopoly cable company telling me how I can watch the TV signal for which I am paying more than $70 per month. They have already blocked my TV's ability to receive updated program info which my TV uses for the TV Guide. It has been OFF (but plugged in) all night and still has NO LISTING for ALL the stations!