Cord cutters alert: 60 million Americans now use an antenna to watch free TV

Discussion in 'Displays' started by Kevin Collins, Jun 24, 2013.

  1. Kevin Collins

    Kevin Collins Owner, from The Other Washington
    Owner

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,765
    Likes Received:
    69
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Real Name:
    Kevin Collins
    I had to re-read this headline when I saw it. While i have an OTA on my roof, no one else in my development does, they are primarily using cable with some outliers using satellite. Note, I also have DISH.

    At any rate, 19.3 percent of all US TV households get their TV fix from free over-the-air broadcasts, according to a new GfK study released this week. This means that 22.4 million households representing 59.7 million Americans get their TV for free, the market research firm estimates.

    The number of these over-the-air only households is growing: In 2010, only 14 percent of all households were getting their TV this way. Growth is especially strong amongst younger households, lower-income families and minorities. And once you take a closer look at those audiences, it’s really clear that free over-the-air viewing isn’t an oddity anymore, but something that’s gathering momentum quickly.

    Do you have OTA? I suspect our friends at Antennas Direct are benefiting from this resurgence.
     
  2. Al.Anderson

    Al.Anderson Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Messages:
    2,535
    Likes Received:
    68
    Real Name:
    Al
    I'm OTA, but not a "cord cutter", as I've always been OTA. I could never justify the cost.

    The only viewing that suffers is local sports. But I think my wife an I turn that into an advantage, as we head out once a week or so to a local sports bar to watch a game. Getting out of the house makes it more of a "date" than catching the game at home, where one or the other of us is distracted.

    Like most HTFers we have a bazillion DVDs, plus Netflix and Amazon Prime; so I'm never short of things to watch.
     
  3. Ejanss

    Ejanss Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    Messages:
    2,452
    Likes Received:
    376
    Real Name:
    EricJ
    Being in a mountain valley (not Shangri-La, but close), we don't GET OTA signals in the city, so cable pretty much has a monopoly on all broadcasting.
    It's surprising, though to hear that people are cutting cords for broadcast, not streaming. That makes sense, since with the slow death of cable, all the "good" shows are back to being on the big six free networks again. Doesn't help the rest of us that much, though--I still keep basic channels so I can get local news, but if it wasn't in a package deal with my Internet, I'd have passed it over for Netflix/Hulu/Blu-ray long ago.
     
  4. Type A

    Type A HW Reviewer
    HW Reviewer

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2007
    Messages:
    800
    Likes Received:
    44
    Location:
    Portland Oregon
    Real Name:
    Ty
    My monthly Comcast bill always leaves a bad taste in my mouth but, tbh, most all of what we watch is cable TV programming (history, tru, sci fi, military, id, ect ect). Cable seems ridiculously overpriced but I also consider it irreplacable in my household.
     
  5. Ejanss

    Ejanss Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    Messages:
    2,452
    Likes Received:
    376
    Real Name:
    EricJ
    I don't HAVE network-tier cable channels (History, MTV, Nick, etc.), but I also don't miss anything, since just about every cable network reruns their shows on their websites, and what gets run digitally on Discovery, TLC, History, BBCAmerica, Comedy Central, or what corporately have you, sooner or later ends up on Netflix/Hulu.
    History Channel may be good, but I wouldn't pay an extra $30 a month for it, if "Hatfields & McCoys" already shows up on my existing Instant Netflix subscription, to watch at my own schedule and leisure. Seriously, what ARE you paying for, nowadays?

    (Although Comcast now also started encrypting their basic channels, and saddled me, like it or not, with Da Box--Which means my days of plugging the cable directly into the cable-ready set and getting all the local over-the-air HDTV channels are gone, unless I buy their "Digital HD package" for $99/mo. minimum, not counting box-fee.
    Ohh, Comcast, the minute and second you offer a competitive Internet-only deal...)
     
  6. schan1269

    schan1269 HTF Expert
    HW Reviewer

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2012
    Messages:
    17,112
    Likes Received:
    899
    Location:
    Chicago-ish/NW Indiana
    Real Name:
    Sam
    I've always used OTA w/DirecTV. Now my reason is the humongous antenna aimed at Indianapolis for Colts/Pacers games.
     
  7. douglas-b

    douglas-b Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    196
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Indiana
    Real Name:
    Douglas Berry
    I tried to cut the cord but it reality the digital signal just isn't robust enough for it to work for me. I spent several hundred dollars and just shy of putting up a tower and decided enough was enough. I went to a fiber optic setup. More expensive, but way more reliable.
     
  8. mychaelp

    mychaelp Auditioning

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2013
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Real Name:
    Michael
    We need to be careful, if too many people cut the cord, revenues will shrink and the networks will stop broadcasting over-the-air. It's been hinted at before. They are loving that they now get rebroadcast fees from the providers.
     

Share This Page