Comcast shrugs off years of cord-cutting losses, adds 89K TV customers

Though broadband has more customers, Comcast's cable TV is a bigger money-maker.

Read the whole story

 

[lewax00]

Which sounds good on paper and all, but the reality is probably at least in part due to bundling. It was cheaper for me to get Internet and TV than to get just Internet, so I have TV service, but I've never even attached the cable box.

And of course, on my bill, the Internet is just a small add-on to the TV price, so the TV certainly looks more profitable, but the reality is, as a consumer, the entire value I get is from the Internet connection.

Basically, it's all just accounting shenanigans.

 

[JiveTurkeyJerky]

Any relation to them raising internet prices to the point that it was a trivial expense or even a net savings to take the package that included TV?

I don't live in a Comcast area, so not entirely up to date on their pricing. I do remember looking when it seemed like they were ready to gobble up TWC - they offered some package where it was only $15 to add Cable+HBO, which I would have taken for the HBO if they didn't require me to rent a Cablebox.

 

[peragrin]

JiveTurkeyJerky[/url]":a7ef6e7n]Any relation to them raising internet prices to the point that is was a trivial expense or even a net savings to take the package that included TV?

I don't live in a Comcast area, so not entirely up to date on their pricing. I do remember looking when it seemed like they were ready to gobble up TWC - they offered some package where it was only $15 to add Cable+HBO, which I would have taken for the HBO if they didn't require me to rent a Cablebox.

this is it exactly stand alone internet service is up 40% in the last two years(since I cut out cable TV.

Still paying $100 a month for just 25mb is better than paying $160 a month for tv, telephone and internet.

yea Comcast and non competition

 

[Deleted member 330960]

I'm a comcast TV customer without my TV cable box plugged in. It's cheaper to get TV + broadband + HBOGo than it is to get broadband + HBONow. I'm finding it hard to get a decent price for broadband only even at 25 Mbps.
Edit - typos

 

[lewax00]

peragrin[/url]":3u5cm9h5]

JiveTurkeyJerky[/url]":3u5cm9h5]Any relation to them raising internet prices to the point that is was a trivial expense or even a net savings to take the package that included TV?

I don't live in a Comcast area, so not entirely up to date on their pricing. I do remember looking when it seemed like they were ready to gobble up TWC - they offered some package where it was only $15 to add Cable+HBO, which I would have taken for the HBO if they didn't require me to rent a Cablebox.

this is it exactly stand alone internet service is up 40% in the last two years(since I cut out cable TV.

Still paying $100 a month for just 25mb is better than paying $160 a month for tv, telephone and internet.

yea Comcast and non competition

Or, paying $60 a month for 105 Mbps + TV is better than paying $70 a month for 105 Mbps alone (or $60 for 50 Mbps alone). Those were my options.

 

[SavingPrincess]

This is 100% due to artificially inflating internet prices and then saying "But if you bundle with TV, you can cut the cost of the bill in half."

Source: ME

I fought Comcast to switch to an internet only plan of the same speed as my bundle. It would have been $40 more per month (for the same speed, without TV) and they would have to send someone to my house to INSTALL a piece of hardware on the line that PREVENTED me from getting TV as well.

 

[Car Analogy]

Yep they have always padded their subscriber numbers by adding a small TV service that makes your bill cheaper by 5 bucks or so. Makes you wonder just how much money they are making by doing that and where does it come from?

 

[jappleng]

Permanent cord cutting would be nice if cellular ISPs in the US would offer unlimited bandwidth and tethering as a normal thing like they do in many other countries. If they did this, I would be more than happy to drop my ISP and stick with phone-only internet and tether my whole house from there or at least just get an internet-only plan for at home.

Basically it's not so much that people want Comcast, it's more or less because they have no choice either due to the lack of competition or the bundling deal makes it advantageous. Personally I stick with principle and have internet with netflix, hulu and prime. I locked in on a rate of $30/mo. for internet with dedicated 25mbps fiber, and i never looked back. Plus it's faster than comcast's 50mbps which on average only got less than 15 or so.

 

[gbourozikas]

I am one of those customers! It's cheaper for me to get the bundle than it is to get Internet alone. Oh, I complained... I even returned the cable box, still shrink-wrapped. My other option is DSL from Verizon at 1.5 Mbps down. (No, this is not a typo.)

 

[pr0t0]

As someone who has been apartment shopping lately, I don't read too much into these numbers. 10 of the 12 apartment complexes I've looked had exclusive contracts with AT&T. This means that no other cable provider is allowed come on premises to provide service...unless they can do it wirelessly.

Comcast does not serve my area, but I'll bet they have similar deals with the apartment complexes in the areas they do serve. In my area, complexes are sprouting everywhere. Although it's likely impossible to get the numbers, I would be very curious to see if there is a correlation between the Comcast increases and apartment complex housing.

 

[jappleng]

Car Analogy[/url]":3vb2ih4a]Yep they have always padded their subscriber numbers by adding a small TV service that makes your bill cheaper by 5 bucks or so. Makes you wonder just how much money they are making by doing that and where does it come from?

Markup and promotional deals. If you get internet now for $50 a month (let's say) and a year later the normal rate is $40, you'll still be paying $50 a month by ignorance and I'm pretty sure most people don't realize that their bill is jacked up due to being grandfathered into it. They don't reduce your monthly bill when they bring down the price later on. Take a look at your grandparent's bill if their still around, they might have a near $300 bill just to check email once a year. Comcast makes a killing off of these people that don't call in to negotiate every 6 months. If they don't want to negotiate, then tell them you'll want to cancel and they'll bring you over to retention where they'll bring down the rate as low as they possibly can while still making a good profit from you.

On top of all of this comcast doesn't just provide just internet, phone and TV, they also provide security services, TV networks, theme parks and other things I'm not sure of. They're doing pretty well despite lots of people cord cutting.

 

[gullible skeptic]

"Though broadband has more customers, Comcast's cable TV is a bigger money-maker."

The sub-head refers to moneymaking, yet the word profit does not appear in the article anywhere. Revenue is not moneymaking. Revenue of any size does not even guarantee that you are not, in fact, bleeding money profusely. And, IIRC, Comcast was using their broadband to subsidize their cable.

 

[kinisonkhan]

I wonder if they count people like myself, who subscribe to digital cable in August (NFL Pre-Season) and cancel TV service the day after the Superbowl. Cablecard rental is $1, so I dont mind paying that when I dont have TV service, its better than hauling cable boxes back and forth and going through the painful registration of both boxes every year.

 

[Antron Argaiv]

JiveTurkeyJerky[/url]":32y8qrz0]Any relation to them raising internet prices to the point that it was a trivial expense or even a net savings to take the package that included TV?

I don't live in a Comcast area, so not entirely up to date on their pricing. I do remember looking when it seemed like they were ready to gobble up TWC - they offered some package where it was only $15 to add Cable+HBO, which I would have taken for the HBO if they didn't require me to rent a Cablebox.

When I cut the Comcast TV cord last year, it was $120-$140, exactly twice what internet alone cost ($60-$70)

I didn't think their standard TV package, including a half-dozen home shopping channels and several channels broadcasting random religious stuff was worth $60/month.

I'm lucky enough to live on the top of a hill with a clear shot to the broadcast antennas (and the two major antenna sites are in line with each other from my location!), so I bought a UHF beam and a preamp, ran coax to my basement and discovered that digital broadcast TV is much better than I remembered..

 

[lewax00]

gullible skeptic[/url]":1nwv7yzy]

"Though broadband has more customers, Comcast's cable TV is a bigger money-maker."

The sub-head refers to moneymaking, yet the word profit does not appear in the article anywhere. Revenue is not moneymaking. Revenue of any size does not even guarantee that you are not, in fact, bleeding money profusely. And, IIRC, Comcast was using their broadband to subsidize their cable.

They likely are subsidizing TV with Internet, but they bill it in such a way that the cable looks more profitable e.g. I pay $60 for TV+Internet, but it's billed as only $15 for Internet, when the Internet alone would have been $70. Then there's no reason for you to not get TV, and they're making $45/month on TV where they would have otherwise made $0, while from the consumer's perspective they saved money on what they actually wanted, Internet.

Creative accounting at it's finest.

 

[SunnyD]

My bill went up by another $10 last month. I just found out yesterday that I lost a handful of channels as well. Guess what I'm doing this week...

 

[anon_coward]

lewax00[/url]":3lmbqvwu]

gullible skeptic[/url]":3lmbqvwu]

"Though broadband has more customers, Comcast's cable TV is a bigger money-maker."

The sub-head refers to moneymaking, yet the word profit does not appear in the article anywhere. Revenue is not moneymaking. Revenue of any size does not even guarantee that you are not, in fact, bleeding money profusely. And, IIRC, Comcast was using their broadband to subsidize their cable.

They likely are subsidizing TV with Internet, but they bill it in such a way that the cable looks more profitable e.g. I pay $60 for TV+Internet, but it's billed as only $15 for Internet, when the Internet alone would have been $70. Then there's no reason for you to not get TV, and they're making $45/month on TV where they would have otherwise made $0, while from the consumer's perspective they saved money on what they actually wanted, Internet.

Creative accounting at it's finest.

they aren't making $45 on TV because if you have TV they have to pay Disney, Paramount, Discovery and other companies for the channels they provide. it's something like $30 a month.

Internet is only the costs of installation, operations and service on the debt

 

[Uxorious]

Car Analogy[/url]":20t9if7f]Yep they have always padded their subscriber numbers by adding a small TV service that makes your bill cheaper by 5 bucks or so. Makes you wonder just how much money they are making by doing that and where does it come from?

My guess is the money comes from advertisers, for whom Comcast can say they have "x" number of cable subscribers, even if those that actually watch are x-y (where y = those who got cable because it would decrease their Internet bill, but haven't actually hooked up a TV…).

 

[Elindalyne]

My internet alone was $10 less than internet/tv bundled... For $10 a month am I willing to get tv? Yes. When it goes up after the year promotion, I'll end up getting rid of the TV.

 

[lewax00]

lewax00[/url]":2zooxncw]

gullible skeptic[/url]":2zooxncw]

"Though broadband has more customers, Comcast's cable TV is a bigger money-maker."

The sub-head refers to moneymaking, yet the word profit does not appear in the article anywhere. Revenue is not moneymaking. Revenue of any size does not even guarantee that you are not, in fact, bleeding money profusely. And, IIRC, Comcast was using their broadband to subsidize their cable.

They likely are subsidizing TV with Internet, but they bill it in such a way that the cable looks more profitable e.g. I pay $60 for TV+Internet, but it's billed as only $15 for Internet, when the Internet alone would have been $70. Then there's no reason for you to not get TV, and they're making $45/month on TV where they would have otherwise made $0, while from the consumer's perspective they saved money on what they actually wanted, Internet.

Creative accounting at it's finest.

they aren't making $45 on TV because if you have TV they have to pay Disney, Paramount, Discovery and other companies for the channels they provide. it's something like $30 a month.

Internet is only the costs of installation, operations and service on the debt

The point is, they're getting that money either way, but under this scheme, they get to claim it was for TV service. Which artificially inflates their subscriber numbers and cable revenue, and gives them negotiation leverage with networks (networks want eyes on their channels so they cans sell ads). I'm sure it's a net gain for them in the end, otherwise there's no sane reason to offer TV+Internet for less than Internet.

 

[Stone]

Looks like I'm not alone. I'm paying $55/mo for 100Mb internet, along with a standard definition tuner with a shit cable package that I turned on one time to activate the package - they told me I had to activate the tuner to get the deal I got. I've never watched it since.

Comcast can go ahead and chalk me up as a success, but I think they're aware that it's a fake number.

 

[MagicDot]

As much as I celebrated the day I cut the cord, I hope the cable companies get through this just fine - why? Because as long as cord cutters remain a minority, the service we receive will be superior. It's just like when cable first came to our neighborhood in late 1970's. It was awesome! No commercials, continues 24/7 programming, no FCC interference. But then it became popular...and look what it is now.

 

[CatsRidingRoombas]

That tells me that those 89000 new customers had no other choices available besides Comcast.

Comcast is more vulnerable to real competition than just about any other company, if we had true competition in the cable industry, Comcast would be out of business by now, simply because people hate them so much.

 

[Jobra Commander]

lewax00[/url]":1bw9o47d]Which sounds good on paper and all, but the reality is probably at least in part due to bundling. It was cheaper for me to get Internet and TV than to get just Internet, so I have TV service, but I've never even attached the cable box.

And of course, on my bill, the Internet is just a small add-on to the TV price, so the TV certainly looks more profitable, but the reality is, as a consumer, the entire value I get is from the Internet connection.

Basically, it's all just accounting shenanigans.

Exactly my experience, and everyone else its seems (from reading of the comments). Haven't used the cable box once.

 

[MiggityMikeB]

This is why I chose to pay $5 more per month for just internet back when I was on Comcast years ago. It would have been $5 cheaper per month to let them bundle a basic TV service with my internet, but I chose to keep just the internet and pay more because I didn't want them to be able to pad their numbers like this.

 

[Leiesoldat]

Watch AT&T's DSL numbers plummet even further when they cease to offer U-Verse and switch totally to satellite internet.

 

[Statistical]

peragrin[/url]":2385tr6w]

JiveTurkeyJerky[/url]":2385tr6w]Any relation to them raising internet prices to the point that is was a trivial expense or even a net savings to take the package that included TV?

I don't live in a Comcast area, so not entirely up to date on their pricing. I do remember looking when it seemed like they were ready to gobble up TWC - they offered some package where it was only $15 to add Cable+HBO, which I would have taken for the HBO if they didn't require me to rent a Cablebox.

this is it exactly stand alone internet service is up 40% in the last two years(since I cut out cable TV.

Still paying $100 a month for just 25mb is better than paying $160 a month for tv, telephone and internet.

yea Comcast and non competition

Or, paying $60 a month for 105 Mbps + TV is better than paying $70 a month for 105 Mbps alone (or $60 for 50 Mbps alone). Those were my options.

Was that $60 before or after STB and/or DVR fees. I mean that is Comcast's usual game.

$70 for internet
$60 for internet + cable = $105 after STB fee, broadcast fee, sports fee, DVR fee.

 

[Quiet Desperation]

I can't even get my elderly dad to understand the concept of not having cable. Internet streaming is like interstellar teleportation to him.

"You spent most of your life before cable even existed!" I say.

Then next week he asks me if I saw that show on F/X or the CW.

 

[graylshaped]

lewax00[/url]":1j85n2vs]Which sounds good on paper and all, but the reality is probably at least in part due to bundling. It was cheaper for me to get Internet and TV than to get just Internet, so I have TV service, but I've never even attached the cable box.

And of course, on my bill, the Internet is just a small add-on to the TV price, so the TV certainly looks more profitable, but the reality is, as a consumer, the entire value I get is from the Internet connection.

Basically, it's all just accounting shenanigans.

Well put. I called Verizon to cut the cord, and asked for their best rate on Internet-only service at various speeds. Wound up agreeing to 75 up/75 down plus a local channel only package on a non-promotional rate for $10 less per month than 50/50 would be. I asked about purchasing the modem rather than renting: "Good news! The modem is no charge with this bundle." I doubt it would have been if I hadn't asked, though.

Dusted off an HDHomerun I had in the garage, and am now putting an extra $110/mo in the kid's college fund. Verizon, on the other hand, gets to crow they retained a TV customer.

 

[samanime]

It even goes beyond bundling. When I first started with Comcast, I got a bundle. Once the special price on that bundle ended, I cancelled my cable and went to just Internet. I then later got a call offering me cable+Internet at an indefinite price for about $5 LESS than I was paying for just Internet. So I took it.

The cable box went back to them, unopened, when I moved.

They're 100% doing this to inflate their cable numbers so they can get more advertising revenue. It'd be very interesting if they published how many people never even activate their cable boxes.

 

[anon_coward]

Quiet Desperation[/url]":2kcy6gi3]I can't even get my elderly dad to understand the concept of not having cable. Internet streaming is like interstellar teleportation to him.

"You spent most of your life before cable even existed!" I say.

Then next week he asks me if I saw that show on F/X or the CW.

i have cable but the only thing i watch live is turning on CNN for my kids in the morning and sports. any other show i want on cable i can watch via their streaming apps. like The Expanse. and even then half the games i stream to my ipad while doing something else

 

[Antron Argaiv]

Elindalyne[/url]":1f7gk8ob]My internet alone was $10 less than internet/tv bundled... For $10 a month am I willing to get tv? Yes. When it goes up after the year promotion, I'll end up getting rid of the TV.

Exactly the opposite for me -- internet alone is $10 more than when bundled with TV.

 

[lewax00]

peragrin[/url]":8ag7usg7]

JiveTurkeyJerky[/url]":8ag7usg7]Any relation to them raising internet prices to the point that is was a trivial expense or even a net savings to take the package that included TV?

I don't live in a Comcast area, so not entirely up to date on their pricing. I do remember looking when it seemed like they were ready to gobble up TWC - they offered some package where it was only $15 to add Cable+HBO, which I would have taken for the HBO if they didn't require me to rent a Cablebox.

this is it exactly stand alone internet service is up 40% in the last two years(since I cut out cable TV.

Still paying $100 a month for just 25mb is better than paying $160 a month for tv, telephone and internet.

yea Comcast and non competition

Or, paying $60 a month for 105 Mbps + TV is better than paying $70 a month for 105 Mbps alone (or $60 for 50 Mbps alone). Those were my options.

Was that $60 before or after STB and/or DVR fees. I mean that is Comcast's usual game.

$70 for internet
$60 for internet + cable = $105 after STB fee, broadcast fee, sports fee, DVR fee.

$67.50 after modem rental fees ($10, I really need to return that, not using it any more...) and miscellany. So I'm actually coming up short $2.50 somehow. But l don't use the TV service, so no way in hell am I paying the rent on a DVR, I just have the free SD-only box.

 

[cedral]

lewax00[/url]":1e6bpeb8]Which sounds good on paper and all, but the reality is probably at least in part due to bundling. It was cheaper for me to get Internet and TV than to get just Internet, so I have TV service, but I've never even attached the cable box.

And of course, on my bill, the Internet is just a small add-on to the TV price, so the TV certainly looks more profitable, but the reality is, as a consumer, the entire value I get is from the Internet connection.

Basically, it's all just accounting shenanigans.

Me too. That is exactly what I came here to say. I got comcast and the cable box stays in the closet.

 

[mmiller7]

Antron Argaiv[/url]":1xfrmm1f]

JiveTurkeyJerky[/url]":1xfrmm1f]Any relation to them raising internet prices to the point that it was a trivial expense or even a net savings to take the package that included TV?

I don't live in a Comcast area, so not entirely up to date on their pricing. I do remember looking when it seemed like they were ready to gobble up TWC - they offered some package where it was only $15 to add Cable+HBO, which I would have taken for the HBO if they didn't require me to rent a Cablebox.

When I cut the Comcast TV cord last year, it was $120-$140, exactly twice what internet alone cost ($60-$70)

I didn't think their standard TV package, including a half-dozen home shopping channels and several channels broadcasting random religious stuff was worth $60/month.

I'm lucky enough to live on the top of a hill with a clear shot to the broadcast antennas (and the two major antenna sites are in line with each other from my location!), so I bought a UHF beam and a preamp, ran coax to my basement and discovered that digital broadcast TV is much better than I remembered..

You really are lucky...when OTA went all-digital, we went from "most channels out of 2 cities" to "can sometimes get 1 channel from 1 city".

 

[Azethoth666]

RickFromTexas[/url]":1fzyf018]That tells me that those 89000 new customers had no other choices available besides Comcast.

Comcast is more vulnerable to real competition than just about any other company, if we had true competition in the cable industry, Comcast would be out of business by now, simply because people hate them so much.

I am a forced Comcast customer. My other choice is DSL which is laughable. They have already lost me as a customer. The only question is who I switch to. Hoping it will be google fiber in San Jose.

 

[Akemi]

lewax00[/url]":3oezokqs]

peragrin[/url]":3oezokqs]

JiveTurkeyJerky[/url]":3oezokqs]Any relation to them raising internet prices to the point that is was a trivial expense or even a net savings to take the package that included TV?

I don't live in a Comcast area, so not entirely up to date on their pricing. I do remember looking when it seemed like they were ready to gobble up TWC - they offered some package where it was only $15 to add Cable+HBO, which I would have taken for the HBO if they didn't require me to rent a Cablebox.

this is it exactly stand alone internet service is up 40% in the last two years(since I cut out cable TV.

Still paying $100 a month for just 25mb is better than paying $160 a month for tv, telephone and internet.

yea Comcast and non competition

Or, paying $60 a month for 105 Mbps + TV is better than paying $70 a month for 105 Mbps alone (or $60 for 50 Mbps alone). Those were my options.

In a similar boat. Their highest speed here is 75Mb (called Blast - which means nothing since Blast has different speed tiers depending upon location) which top out around 100Mbs due to bonded channels. I can get the Internet alone (now that my 1 year nice rate is up) for $65/mo or for $60/mo (after all fess/taxes) get the same Internet access speeds and basic cable. Needless to say, I don't even have the cable box plugged in.

That's called strong-arming people, and isn't in any way a real tangible add-on if I'm not even using the service. I hope the networks and content creators are paying attention to the numbers of actual viewers and not what Comcast is claiming.

I'd most certainly drop the cable service if that wasn't going to increase my monthly bill.

 

[mpetty423]

I think that advertisers are getting smart to this bundling thing. I had the TV+Internet package where it was cheaper than internet alone, and I never plugged in the cable box.

Then I moved and temporarily redid the same thing. That time I had to plug in the cable box to activate it. Then I never turned it back on. When I moved back I did the same thing again. A couple of months in and my bill went up. Apparently my tuner went "de-activated" because I hadn't used it in like 3 months, voiding the deal. So now if you don't turn it on and watch TV at least once every 3 months, you don't qualify for the pricing discount. So I just dropped it all together and am paying the extra $10/month for internet alone to just not deal with the hassle. But I can imagine a future where you're eventually forced into a quota of having the TV on for a certain amount of time to qualify.

Advertisers are asking for more than just subscriptions, but detailed breakdowns of viewing habits to ensure that they're getting a fair shake, rather than inflated numbers, and Comcast is turning the screws to try and get actual view-time up so that advertising slots remain as profitable as possible.

 

[shadowjin]

Those numbers are also twisted.

I know two friends and have an aunt who recently bought a house in a planned community (gated) that cable is included for free. I don't believe it's free, it's must be part of a fee they pay for upkeep in the community since I highly doubt Comcast would give the whole community free cable service.. From what they said there is no opt out option. You can only opt out of lawn mowing service and mow the lawn yourself and get Internet from them. Whatever they pay monthly for this community i'm positive gives them basic level cable service.