By some estimates U.S. cable video penetration is in the mid-60s, at the upper level at 70 percent. Satellite video is said to be between 25 percent and possibly 28 percent. And yet at the same time some estimates show "no provider" other than over-the-air transmissions for as many as 26 million homes, something on the order of 23 percent of U.S. households.The numbers don't square, and there are few explanations other than false reporting by cable and satellite operators; incorrect housing statistics or much-higher-than-expected numbers of homes where consumers are buying multiple subscriptions. False reporting of those sorts of numbers is so unlikely as to be implausible. One has the impression that consumers tend not to buy both satellite and cable video service. Try and think of someone you know who does this.
One can make the argument that multichannel video subscriptions are nearly 100 percent, or as low as 75 percent. So things are better or worse than we might think. It is hard to tell which is the case.
1 comment:
There are a couple of things that throw the numbers off.
Apartments. Providers may show that cable is delivered to a block of apartments. However, that doesn’t mean all take it. Records for surveys often are done by physical address but not broken down to apartment number level.
Some households DO subscribe to both cable and satellite.
> Try and think of someone you know who does this. [subscribe to both cable and satellite].
I can think of three people I know off the top of my head. It comes from cable providers who charge extra for internet access for non-TV subscribers. One person I know has basic cable which (due to PUC restrictions) costs $8 per month but they only have it because they get a $10 reduction in Internet access when signed up for TV. They prefer satellite (for channels they can’t from the cable provider) The cable line is not connected to any actual TVs in the house it is just there because it makes the total Internet bill $2 less per month.
Post a Comment