Approximately 9 years ago I did something I never thought I would do - I cancelled my cable TV subscription. No, I wasn't switching to satellite TV, I was cutting the cord completely. This marked a big turn in my life. Up until that point I always had cable TV, from a child through high school and college, and into adulthood. This marked the first time I'd ever been without cable. This post is my reflection back on that past 9 years, what's changed, would I go back, etc.
First let's talk about the biggest benefit - the savings. My best guess estimate is I've saved $11,000 in those 9 years! That's a lot of money! Before cutting cable my bill was approaching $100/month. Checking current rates they appear to be about $110/month. So an average of $100/month times 9 years equals a lot of saved money.
Another benefit I've noticed is how much more time I have. When you have cable TV it's far too easy to sit down and watch TV. But without cable when your TV only gets 9 local broadcast channels you watch a lot less TV.
A big question is - would I ever switch back to cable TV? The answer is yes, but not in its current form. There are two main things I dislike about cable TV providers in their current form, neither of which is the cost of their service.
Set-top Boxes
I hate set-top boxes. Modern TV are cable of decoding both analog and multiple forms of digital video streams, so why would I want a set-top box? Why add another device and another remote control? Yes, their remote controls usually work the TV too, but this usually never works just right forcing you to keep multiple remotes on hand. Cable companies try and convince you that the set-top box is a benefit to you. But they are deceiving you, they want the set-top box for one main reason - they make more money! A recent government study found the average American family spends $19.32/month renting set-top boxes. Even if you didn't have to rent the set-top box, they still make money. A set-top box is the cable company's gateway into the world of pay-per-view and on-demand TV watching, which is yet another revenue stream for them.
There is another reason cable companies like set-top boxes. It allows them to control both ends of the encryption. Digital TV signals are encrypted to prevent people from stealing cable TV. The set-top box is what decrypts this signal. Going back 20 years, the "cable card" technology was supposed to solve that by allowing your TV to do the decryption. But cable card was never widely adopted by the industry.
What I would love to see is TV manufacturers and cable broadcast get together and create a standard protocol. That way the TV you buy at the store can decrypt and view broadcasts from your cable provider without the need for a set-top box. Of course, this will never happen (unless congress passes a law forcing it to happen), simply because set-top boxes make the cable company money. Why would they eliminate a source of revenue?
Channel Selection
The other big issue that's preventing me from going back to cable TV is channel selection. Cable companies are out of touch with their customers. A recent study by Nielsen TV ratings found that between 2008 and 2013 the average number of channels a cable provider offered increased from 130 to 190. That's an average of 12 new channels per year. However, Nielsen discovered number of channels people actually watch stayed the same at 17. So cable companies are offering more channels which costs more money, but people aren't watching more channels. What's more, people are watching less than 10% of the channels they are paying for.
So I would consider going back to cable if the cable companies offered the ability to pick which channels you want, or at least have more tiers so I can have finer control of what I'm paying for. Of course this will never happen. Broadcasters, like Discovery channel, lock cable broadcasters into contracts. If they want to distribute their top-tier popular channels they must also offer their bottom-of-the-barrel unpopular channels as well.
The whole industry is messed up. I can only hope that as more and more people cut cable in favor of things like Internet streaming options that cable companies will be forced to change their ways. In the meantime I'll enjoy an extra $100 in my wallet each month that is not going to my cable company!
Thursday, January 21, 2016
Tuesday, January 5, 2016
Water savings - update
Several months ago I posted about my water bill and how my water usage had gone down by installing low-flow shower heads and dual-flush toilet conversion. That post was only 3 months in so I wanted to do a followup now that it's almost a year since I made the changes.
The above graph is taken directly from my account on my water company's website. It shows all months usage for 2014 and 2015. The part shaded in red is before I made any changes in my water usage. The part in green is after installing the water saving devices in my house. The 2 month window between the two is a transition period. I installed one shower head and dual-flush converter to try the products out and see if we liked them before ordering more and installing them everywhere in my house.
There are 3 months before making the switch that are deceptively low; January 2014, September 2014, and January 2015. In all 3 cases they correspond to vacations of more than a week in length, so obviously if we're not home we're using less water. If you ignore those 3 months, than my before usage averaged exactly 5.5 units per month (a unit being 100 cubic feet of water or 748 gallons). After the switch that average dropped to exactly 4 units. So we're saving approximately 1.5 units per month, or 1,122 gallons per month, 37 gallons per day, or close to 14,000 gallons in a year.
From a money-savings point of view, water in my area costs $7.90 per unit, so we're saving an average of $11.85 per month, or $142 per year. Considering the hardware for this change cost about $120 I've recouped my investment already and each month will be savings from here on out.
Again, I did not make this switch to save money. I made this switch to save water. Even though it's winter and it's raining outside right now, California is still in a drought and our reservoirs are at an all-time low. Saving water is not only the right thing to do, it's extremely important. Saving money is just an added bonus.
The above graph is taken directly from my account on my water company's website. It shows all months usage for 2014 and 2015. The part shaded in red is before I made any changes in my water usage. The part in green is after installing the water saving devices in my house. The 2 month window between the two is a transition period. I installed one shower head and dual-flush converter to try the products out and see if we liked them before ordering more and installing them everywhere in my house.
There are 3 months before making the switch that are deceptively low; January 2014, September 2014, and January 2015. In all 3 cases they correspond to vacations of more than a week in length, so obviously if we're not home we're using less water. If you ignore those 3 months, than my before usage averaged exactly 5.5 units per month (a unit being 100 cubic feet of water or 748 gallons). After the switch that average dropped to exactly 4 units. So we're saving approximately 1.5 units per month, or 1,122 gallons per month, 37 gallons per day, or close to 14,000 gallons in a year.
From a money-savings point of view, water in my area costs $7.90 per unit, so we're saving an average of $11.85 per month, or $142 per year. Considering the hardware for this change cost about $120 I've recouped my investment already and each month will be savings from here on out.
Again, I did not make this switch to save money. I made this switch to save water. Even though it's winter and it's raining outside right now, California is still in a drought and our reservoirs are at an all-time low. Saving water is not only the right thing to do, it's extremely important. Saving money is just an added bonus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)