Besides, cable TV has its own costs that quietly add up. Want DVR capabilities? That'll cost you a few bucks more every month. Want to watch TV on more than one television? Brace yourself for additional hardware rental fees.
And don't forget that the $50 per month that O'Brien cites is teaser rate that's only good for 12 months. If you want to keep prices low after that, you'll need to call Comcast, threaten to leave, and negotiate a new rate that'll probably still exceed what you were paying before. That's the kind of customer service the naysayers are going to bat for? Really?
I'm not saying the bundle is bad for everyone. If you're looking to replace every channel and every show you might ever conceivably watch, you won't be better off with a la carte streaming services. Want to spend $50 per month (plus hidden costs) for an abundance of channels? Be my guest. Cord cutting merely offers a cheaper alternative, with a growing number of options to suit your specific tastes.
A decade ago, not having cable meant not having much television to watch at all. Now, you've got all kinds of services to choose from, including all the HBO you could ever watch for $15 per month. If there was a time when cord cutting was a misguided fantasy, it's long since passed.
Sign up for CIO Asia eNewsletters.