Consumers Continue to Buy HDTV Sets at Strong Rate, But Many Pass On HD Service

Lee Stewart · 11-25-2008, 04:29 PM

Consumers Continue to Buy HDTV Sets at Strong Rate, But Many Pass On HD Service

Quote:

Last update: 7:06 p.m. EST Nov. 24, 2008

NEW YORK, Nov 24, 2008 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Frank N. Magid Associates' recent study of high-definition television set owners reveals that fewer first-time HDTV set buyers are arranging for high-definition program service from cable and satellite providers than ever before. Among the 12 percent of U.S. households who purchased a new high-definition television in the past year, 41 percent still need to arrange for high-definition program service from a cable or satellite provider, compared to as many as 80 percent with HD service among those who have owned their sets for several years.

"The majority of consumers have the arrangements they need to continue receiving local broadcast television channels following the digital transition (85 days from now), but still have not ordered the necessary service which will provide them with the high-definition programming they expect," said Maryann Baldwin, Vice President, Magid Media Futures. "We believe that many of these HD service rejecters believe they will automatically start receiving their programming in high-definition concurrent with the digital broadcast transition, which, of course, is an incorrect notion."

"Cable and satellite providers need to prepare for the day after the digital transition (February 18, 2009). We believe there will be a jump in HD service demand following the digital transition when HDTV owners realize the transition only pertains to the reception of local television signals, not the delivery of high-definition programming for their cable network lineup," said Jill Rosengard Hill, Senior Vice President.

When asked the degree to which these HDTV set owners have taken time to research their HD programming options, the Magid study reveals that 43 percent of these owners have not looked into HD services from any provider. Only 39 percent looked into cable HD options and 19 percent explored satellite HD options. When asked if there's any chance they may eventually arrange for HD programming service, 16 percent of these most recent HDTV set buyers say they may sign up for satellite HD in the next six months, while 22 percent may sign up for cable HD, suggesting that service providers have the opportunity to pick up another 4.5 percent of TV households as HD programming customers.

Additional reasons for rejecting high-definition programming service include the fact that 41 percent do not believe HD services are worth the required fees, 30 percent feel they don't have it in the budget after buying the HDTV set itself and 18 percent do not feel there are enough channels available in high-definition to make arrangements worthwhile.

This study indicates that tremendous HD customer acquisition opportunities still remain for cable and satellite providers, not just among those who will be purchasing a new HDTV set in the months ahead, but among the 12 percent of households who subscribe to cable and satellite but have not arranged for HD.

Currently, 32 percent of U.S. households own at least one HDTV set, and 64 percent of those owners receive HD programming from their cable or satellite provider, totaling 23 million households viewing HD programming at this time.

Magid releases its seventh consecutive HDTV and Digital Transition Consumer Update this week. The report is available for $6,000 by contacting Julie Zipperer at 319-377-7345 or jzipperer@magid.com.

About Frank N. Magid Associates
Founded in 1957, Frank N. Magid Associates provides research-driven, strategic media counsel on the evolving consumer mindset for clients in 37 countries. The company helps businesses that are struggling to make sense of a constantly evolving marketplace connect with an increasingly elusive, splintered consumer who is seemingly hidden behind an expansive array of technologies. Magid not only provides businesses with an understanding of the attitudes, opinions and actions of today's technology-saturated consumers, but also offers research-driven strategic advice on how to successfully brand, advertise, market and design their products and services. For more information, please visit Magid on the Web at www.magid.com.
SOURCE Frank N. Magid Associates
http://www.magid.com/

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/stor...C7EEA3B0D78%7D

PFC5 · 11-25-2008, 06:26 PM

You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make them drink.

That is the old saying that comes to mind here. Overcharging for the HD service but under delivering HD channels is a big part of the problem for many people. They need more channels, but then the PQ will probably go down unfortunately since they don't expand the pipes enough before adding channels.

Lee Stewart · 11-25-2008, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PFC5

You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make them drink.

That is the old saying that comes to mind here. Overcharging for the HD service but under delivering HD channels is a big part of the problem for many people. They need more channels, but then the PQ will probably go down unfortunately since they don't expand the pipes enough before adding channels.

True.

The poster below me . . .

Here are some of the issues at hand as I see them.

1. Even though HDTV is 10 years old - it really only got popular since 2005. From 1998 to 2005, HDTV limped along with little gains. Now - HDTV is coming on strong. And as long as the cable companies are forced to carry analog signals (which really hog up bandwidth) they will continue to use "brute force" to squeeze more HD channels into the existing bandwidth. SAT is not hampered by this so they are ahead in HD offerring.

2. Many people do believe that when you buy an HDTV, you automatically see HD on your HDTV.

3. Many people just don't give a chit about HD on their HDTV for the reasons listed in the article - apathy and money.

Personally - I have lived through the B&W to Color transition (when for a while, there were only 2 color programs on per week - on the same night) and I am living through the NTSC to HDTV transition (when for a while there was only one or 2 HD programs on per day.

)

I don't think that $5 a month for HD service plus $11 a month for an HD DVR is costly at all. I think it is very reasonable. I always feel that I am getting my money's worth and I am patient because I know my cable company is adding HD channels.

- my bitch is that I am now paying for service I no longer use - all those SD channels.

PFC5 · 11-25-2008, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Stewart

True.

The poster below me . . .

Here are some of the issues at hand as I see them.

1. Even though HDTV is 10 years old - it really only got popular since 2005. From 1998 to 2005, HDTV limped along with little gains. Now - HDTV is coming on strong. And as long as the cable companies are forced to carry analog signals (which really hog up bandwidth) they will continue to use "brute force" to squeeze more HD channels into the existing bandwidth. SAT is not hampered by this so they are ahead in HD offerring.

2. Many people do believe that when you buy an HDTV, you automatically see HD on your HDTV.

3. Many people just don't give a chit about HD on their HDTV for the reasons listed in the article - apathy and money.

Personally - I have lived through the B&W to Color transition (when for a while, there were only 2 color programs on per week - on the same night) and I am living through the NTSC to HDTV transition (when for a while there was only one or 2 HD programs on per day.

)

I don't think that $5 a month for HD service plus $11 a month for an HD DVR is costly at all. I think it is very reasonable. I always feel that I am getting my money's worth and I am patient because I know my cable company is adding HD channels.

- my bitch is that I am now paying for service I no longer use - all those SD channels.

I think that is more than reasonable except that many places charge much more than that. My cable company charges 10.95/mo. for the HD service PER TV, but you ALSO must pay for Digital service for each HDTV @11.95/mo. each too. That means each HDTV that gets HD service costs $21.90 in my town.

That does not include any DVR either, and that costs an extra $12.95/mo. per set I think. See why only TWO of my FOUR HDTVs has HD service?

HD Goofnut · 11-25-2008, 07:28 PM

With DirecTV you are required to have a certain package if you have an HD DVR and the minimum for the package is $62.99 before any premium channels. There is no HD service charge as it is included in the package price, but you have to pay $4.99 for every receiver (each month) after your first one. I think DirecTV's cheapest SD package is $29.99. So when J6P sees that they can save $33 per month they figure that it's not worth it at least when it comes to DirecTV.

DonnyDC · 11-25-2008, 08:56 PM

As with most things people dont want a reason to change, it needs to come to the point when they ask themselves 'meh, why not?'
We just need one company to start offering a near equal amount of HD channels at prices barely above regular cable, that'll cause a huge influx of customers and other companies will be forced to match.

Then boom, everyone has HD

Then you'll have companies offering exclusive 1080p, SHD, 3D whatever content and the cycle continues

Dare · 11-26-2008, 12:35 AM

They really need to stop qualifying TVs as high definition. There is no such thing as a TV that isn't high definition anymore. The article should read, people who bought random TVs passed on high-def services.

BTW, HDTV is 40 years old.

PFC5 · 11-26-2008, 01:38 PM

Well people can still buy just digital tuner TVs, but I don't know why they would as they are getting to be almost as expensive as the cheapest HDTVs now in similar sizes.

That being said, if they ARE buying a HDTV then I think it is still relevant if they are not getting HD service since it shows there is still a lot of education and apathy about getting the better PQ. Heck, many people THINK they are getting HD service just from having an HDTV and do not realize they need to upgrade (for more money) to actually receive HD service.

Lee Stewart · 11-26-2008, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dare

They really need to stop qualifying TVs as high definition. There is no such thing as a TV that isn't high definition anymore. The article should read, people who bought random TVs passed on high-def services.

BTW, HDTV is 40 years old.

yes - as a format - but HD broadcasting only started in the USA in 1998.

Eddie501 · 11-26-2008, 02:32 PM

This article makes it seem like it's impossible to receive HD programming without getting a package from a satellite or cable company. I wonder how many of these "HD rejectors" are simply plugging into an antenna & watching free OTA HD from their built in tuners?

Lee Stewart · 11-26-2008, 02:32 PM

Attention Sears Shoppers: Comcast Products Available

Quote:

Marketing Agreement Makes Op’s Video, Data, Telephony Services In 400 Stores

By Linda Haugsted -- Multichannel News, 11/21/2008 7:40:00 AM
Shoppers in Sears, Roebuck and Co. stores throughout the country will now be able to buy home electronics and the telecommunications services that go with them through a marketing agreement between the department store chain and Comcast Corp.

Comcast's digital cable, Internet and telephony services will be available in 400 stores under the terms of the deal. Also, 100 of those stores will be equipped with a Comcast display with an interactive high-definition television that consumers can use to learn about the operator's services.

Sears associates trained by Comcast will be able to speak with customers, The retailer's employees will shoppers select the correct service at the right prices for their electronics purchases, using technology from Bridgevine, an e-tailing solution provider that lists real-time pricing and savings information.

"This effort fits squarely with out vision of improving the lives of our customers by providing quality services, products and solutions that earn their trust and build lifetime relationships," said Jonathan Magasanik, vice president and general merchandise manager of electronics at Sears, in a statement.

The partnership will also come with rebates for the Sears consumers. One-product purchasers will receive a mail-in rebate for up to $100; a triple-play buyer can earn a rebate of up to $250.

"Our goal is to work with Sears to help customers experience instant gratification knowing that they'll be live with Comcast when they set up their new electronic equipment at home, and the satisfaction of knowing that they have received the best price," saidComcast senior vice president, retail sales and alternative sales channels Bob Faught.

This is the latest retail partnership for Comcast. The provider has also contracted for in-store sales in the past with furniture retailers, Best Buy, Office Max, Radio Shack and other chain stores.

http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6616650.html

Lee Stewart · 11-26-2008, 02:36 PM

I posted the above article because IMO - this is what is needed.

At least they may pick up the uninformed consumer who doesn't see the money being the primary issue.

11-25-2008, 06:26 PM	#2
PFC5 Former Super Moderator - RIP Join Date: May 2005 Location: Mass Posts: 38,295	You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make them drink. That is the old saying that comes to mind here. Overcharging for the HD service but under delivering HD channels is a big part of the problem for many people. They need more channels, but then the PQ will probably go down unfortunately since they don't expand the pipes enough before adding channels. __________________ Denon AVR-887 Klipsch RP-5 Pwred Towers (mains) (525 watts peak each 12"Subs) All Klipsch RC-25(ctr),(2)SS1(surr),(2)SS1(rearSurr) Toshiba (2)HD-A20,PS3,BD35 For SACD/DVD-A Samsung HD-841 Panny 50pz80u plasma SETTINGS RCA HD50LPW162 50"DLP w/HD2+ SA 3250HD 47" LCD+Yamaha5790+HD-A1(bedroom) Harmony 680 + (2) 670s (amazing remote/support) Game room with Onkyo receiver & B&W Speakers The_Cable_Game Take the high ground and be happier PSN: PFC5

11-25-2008, 07:28 PM	#5
HD Goofnut Official HDF BD Reviewer Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Mississippi, U.S.A. Your resident Dune, Star Wars, and war film expert Posts: 9,556	With DirecTV you are required to have a certain package if you have an HD DVR and the minimum for the package is $62.99 before any premium channels. There is no HD service charge as it is included in the package price, but you have to pay $4.99 for every receiver (each month) after your first one. I think DirecTV's cheapest SD package is $29.99. So when J6P sees that they can save $33 per month they figure that it's not worth it at least when it comes to DirecTV. __________________ BenQ MP512ST, Panasonic TC-L55ET5 55" 360Hz LED/3D, Sharp LC-46SB57UN 46" 120 Hz LCD, Sanyo DP46848 46" 60Hz LCD, HP 21.5" 60Hz LCD Onkyo TX-NR709 7.1/Onkyo SKS-HT540 ASUS BD Drive, LG BH200, Sony Optiarc Blu-ray Burner, Sony BDP-590, Vizio VBR220 My Motion Picture Collection Latest BD Review: *Jack Reacher*

11-26-2008, 12:35 AM	#7
Dare I moon you. Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Phoenix, Arizona Posts: 4,523	They really need to stop qualifying TVs as high definition. There is no such thing as a TV that isn't high definition anymore. The article should read, people who bought random TVs passed on high-def services. BTW, HDTV is 40 years old. __________________ LG GGC-H20L Super Multi Blue Blu-ray & HD DVD ROM Drive 58 Lost count

11-26-2008, 01:38 PM	#8
PFC5 Former Super Moderator - RIP Join Date: May 2005 Location: Mass Posts: 38,295	Well people can still buy just digital tuner TVs, but I don't know why they would as they are getting to be almost as expensive as the cheapest HDTVs now in similar sizes. That being said, if they ARE buying a HDTV then I think it is still relevant if they are not getting HD service since it shows there is still a lot of education and apathy about getting the better PQ. Heck, many people THINK they are getting HD service just from having an HDTV and do not realize they need to upgrade (for more money) to actually receive HD service. __________________ Denon AVR-887 Klipsch RP-5 Pwred Towers (mains) (525 watts peak each 12"Subs) All Klipsch RC-25(ctr),(2)SS1(surr),(2)SS1(rearSurr) Toshiba (2)HD-A20,PS3,BD35 For SACD/DVD-A Samsung HD-841 Panny 50pz80u plasma SETTINGS RCA HD50LPW162 50"DLP w/HD2+ SA 3250HD 47" LCD+Yamaha5790+HD-A1(bedroom) Harmony 680 + (2) 670s (amazing remote/support) Game room with Onkyo receiver & B&W Speakers The_Cable_Game Take the high ground and be happier PSN: PFC5

Similar Threads to Consumers Continue to Buy HDTV Sets at Strong Rate, But Many Pass On HD Service
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
I Still Predict Slow Adoption of HD-DVD & Blu-ray	doggie	High Definition Media	32	11-25-2006 06:45 PM

11-25-2008, 08:56 PM	#6
DonnyDC High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 2,731	As with most things people dont want a reason to change, it needs to come to the point when they ask themselves 'meh, why not?' We just need one company to start offering a near equal amount of HD channels at prices barely above regular cable, that'll cause a huge influx of customers and other companies will be forced to match. Then boom, everyone has HD Then you'll have companies offering exclusive 1080p, SHD, 3D whatever content and the cycle continues

11-26-2008, 02:32 PM	#10
Eddie501 High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 199	This article makes it seem like it's impossible to receive HD programming without getting a package from a satellite or cable company. I wonder how many of these "HD rejectors" are simply plugging into an antenna & watching free OTA HD from their built in tuners?

11-26-2008, 02:36 PM	#12
Lee Stewart Muscle Cars Forever! Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 35,092	I posted the above article because IMO - this is what is needed. At least they may pick up the uninformed consumer who doesn't see the money being the primary issue.