We’ve come full circle sadly. YouTube TV raised fares with more channels I don’t watch or want. Netflix increases rates and further creates walled garden.
Everyone wanting to cut the cord isn’t better off then we were 5 years ago.
Everyone wanting to cut the cord isn’t better off then we were 5 years ago.
I also regularly rotate services. For example, Amazon Prime is how I'm getting my HBO. I'm ready to remove that channel for a few months until the shows I watch return. I've done that with Acorn (UK programming) and with Showtime.
Looking at the proliferation of silos (Peacock, AppleTV+, Disney, Netflix, HBO Max, Hulu, etc.), it's going to get harder to have a decent all-in-one place to go for content. But this is what a lot of cord cutters insisted that they wanted ("Why do I have to pay for ESPN if I don't watch it?"). Turns out it might not be cheaper after all? That is unless you're willing to put a little effort into rotating active services.
I dropped phone and cable a while back and it saves me quite a bit of money overall but I do lose some things because of it.
As I said in another comment, you can just keep one subscription active at a time. It is way cheaper than cable and you can still rotate pretty quickly.
If something really good comes, you can subscribe to both for a short period, but most of the time you can do pretty well with just keeping one active.
I wish a Netflix-for-sports existed already, though. I always had to keep the basic cable just to watch my team's football (soccer) games because you can't get those in any other way.
Then what does cable TV have a monopoly on?