Cord-Cutting Continues, Broadcast-Only TV Homes Increase

A new study says broadcast-only TV homes are continuing to increase.

This year, 19.3% of U.S. TV homes -- 22 million homes -- will be broadcast-only and not subscribing to any pay TV service. A year ago, some 20.7 million-plus homes were broadcast-only, per researcher GfK.

The research company says this would be nearly a 40% rise from three years ago, when 14% of TV homes were paying for TV via cable, telco, or satellite TV distributors.

The report said the No. 1 reason was financial; 60% of those who cancelled their pay TV service cited cost-cutting as the reason. More online video viewing and Internet-connected TV options may have boosted cord-cutting.

Other reasons for cord-cutting, according to CouponCabin, include not watching enough TV (27%); alternative ways of watching live TV (17%); and watching few TV channels (17%).

Looking at ethnicity, African-American and Hispanic-American TV homes have been climbing among overall broadcast-only households, while Asian-American TV homes are going in the other direction, according to the report.  

Some 23% of Asian-American homes are broadcast-only, down from 30% three years ago. African-American TV homes have jumped to 22% from 12%; Hispanic-American TV homes are up to 25% from 23%.



6 comments about "Cord-Cutting Continues, Broadcast-Only TV Homes Increase".
Check to receive email when comments are posted.
  1. Douglas Ferguson from College of Charleston, July 9, 2013 at 6 p.m.

    Is this a new error-ridden GfK study or the one from a couple weeks ago. Egad, no one believes OTA homes exceed 10 percent, except those who read studies by GfK. Who pays for GfK studies, NAB or TVB? I can't think of anyone with more to gain from bad information than some broadcast group....

  2. Tim Brooks from consultant, July 9, 2013 at 9:16 p.m.

    They are adding together homes that have always been over-the-air (about 10%) and cord cutters (used to be pay, now OTA). Still sounds a little high compared to other sources, which may be because it is apparently self-reported and a projection ("will be" not "are").

  3. James Smith from J. R. Smith Group, July 10, 2013 at 9:37 a.m.

    It might not all be fluff. Is it possible the higher educated cohort is going the disconnect route due to (he clears his throat) the programming trending toward the less "intelligent?" That along with stressed personal income and increased Internet focus. It's not like the "real" data isn't's just not surfacing.

  4. Edmund Singleton from Winstion Communications, July 11, 2013 at 4:57 a.m.

    Its the product dummy...

  5. Pete Austin from Fresh Relevance, July 11, 2013 at 5:36 a.m.

    Is this a real thing? The average size of "homes" (ie families) is decreasing and family structure is getting more complicated with e.g. couples who both keep their own homes or young people who have not completely left their parents, so you would expect that the ratio of TV subscriptions to "homes" would change even if people's TV watching habits didn't. I'd believe that cord cutters were increasing if there were figures for the number of *people* who are broadcast only - do these figures exist?

  6. Chris Conderino from CC Media and Marketing, July 14, 2013 at 4:27 p.m.

    This seems bogus and misleading. How can it be that only 3 years ago, 14% of all US homes were receiving TV from all 3 distributor types. Considering a home needs one of the 3 to even receive viewable TV programming, the 14% seems way off. Furthermore, in an effort to protect the business model, I thought verification, in the form of being a subscriber, was necessary to view TV programming in other environments like the web. Not supposed to have access to TV programming online without a subscription unless it's old packages on Netflix or Hulu.

Next story loading loading..