Nielsen: report shows decline in TV ownership

[easttxtv]

http://insidetv.ew.com/2011/11/30/tv-ownership-declines/

Now 114.7 million households have TVs, last year--115.9 million.

 

[KeithE4]

http://insidetv.ew.com/2011/11/30/tv-ownership-declines/

Now 114.7 million households have TVs, last year--115.9 million.

I'm guessing that Nielsen doesn't consider laptops and other PCs with TV tuner cards/USB devices to be "televisions." They should.

 

[BMR]

http://insidetv.ew.com/2011/11/30/tv-ownership-declines/

Now 114.7 million households have TVs, last year--115.9 million.

I'm guessing that Nielsen doesn't consider laptops and other PCs with TV tuner cards/USB devices to be "televisions." They should.

I wonder what the formal definition of 'television' is, or whether they simply left it up to the householders surveyed?

In the US, unlike Europe, there is no real financial benefit to *not* owning a TV set, other than the cost of purchase (negligible if you get a 2nd hand tube set), and I suppose the space saved at home.

Another thing, 1% is well within the margin of error of most surveys, so the most we can say with certainity is that TV ownership has peaked.

 

[ansky212]

For the sake of argument let's assume the statistics are accurate. So last year 1.2 million more people owned a TV. So what the heck did 1.2 million people do with their TV in the past year? It's hard to believe that many people would have just thrown them away or sold them. Even people who don't watch TV usually own a set even if it's collecting dust down in the basement.

 

[Markxxx]

Look at people like me in a dense urban city. My case Chicago. I lost all my TV when digital TV came in. I went from 16 good analog stations to zero digital stations and I live only 3 miles NW of Willis (Sears) Tower. I have a laptop if I must watch TV, I just bring it to the library. Otherwise, I do without TV. I don't really miss it much. I know several other people that no longer watch TV since the DTV transition or they, like me use their computers or watch TV sporadically at the gym or other such places

 

[FreddyE1977]

I have kids in their early 20's. Their friends who have already moved out of the house
typically do not take a TV with them to the new place. This generation lives pretty much
online. I think the decline in TV household percentage is coming from this age group going
out on their own and starting to form households.

 

[KeithE4]

I have kids in their early 20's. Their friends who have already moved out of the house typically do not take a TV with them to the new place. This generation lives pretty much online. I think the decline in TV household percentage is coming from this age group going out on their own and starting to form households.

They may be watching programming that is or was broadcast on TV, but they're doing so online. The program providers recognize this (otherwise, they wouldn't allow that programming to be carried online). Apparently Nielsen doesn't.

 

[LKellerIII]

I have kids in their early 20's. Their friends who have already moved out of the house
typically do not take a TV with them to the new place. This generation lives pretty much
online. I think the decline in TV household percentage is coming from this age group going
out on their own and starting to form households.

Same here. Both my older kids no longer live at home. Both are single, and share residences with others, but not bedrooms. Both watch shows they like primarily on their computers. My son (24) just split the cost of an HD TV for the living room with another resident of his apartment, but did not have a TV for over a year. My daughter (28) only watches TV when her landlady (woman in her 40s who owns the house) is home and invites her in - the TV is in the landlady's bedroom.

I think this is pretty typical. When I was their age (mid 70s to mid 80s), the only way to see TV programs was to own a TV, so even if you were poor, you bought one - even if it was only one of those 12 inch black and white sets for under $100.

Computers do both things - you can stay connected in many ways, and probably watch your favorite TV shows online. If you only have enough income to afford one or the other, the computer is the obvious choice.

 

[kilamanjero]

I'm in my late 20s, I can understand why. I'm in a locale that where I prefer not to be at the moment, so TV is my "escape" per se. However, during my times while living in major cities, rarely do I watch TV at all. I watched them on the computer, so not at all. Most of peers are the same way.

 

[Carmine5]

Plus, it's pretty well assumed that consumers who were going to purchase HDTVs have already done so. The HDTV market is nearly played out. Manufacturers realize this and are now working on the "next big thing." 3DTV is proving to be a bust but maybe, just maybe, consumers will bite when SHDTV with its 2160p picture eventually rolls out (the other thing they're working on is an Super HDTV with a 4K resolution picture).

Probably by that time, broadcasters will have migrated to ATSC 2.0 or 3.0 and the tuners in our current HDTVs will have been rendered obsolete anyway.

 

[BMR]

I have kids in their early 20's. Their friends who have already moved out of the house
typically do not take a TV with them to the new place. This generation lives pretty much
online. I think the decline in TV household percentage is coming from this age group going
out on their own and starting to form households.

It will be interesting to see if this generation continue to be laptop only when they move out of their share houses, and maybe get married and have kids.

It's hard to imagine watching a football match or a film together as a family on a laptop!!

 

[arnoldevns]

Simple: last year's data on households was based on a census bureau estimate... This year's is based on the actual enumerated 2010 census. The number of homes with TV hasn't dropped, the estimate is now based on more accurate data.

 

[HoustonListener]

the number of households may have dropped somewhat, too, as foreclosures, etc. and economic hardship encourage people to double up, or move in with relatives, etc.

 

[FreddyE1977]

It's hard to imagine watching a football match or a film together as a family on a laptop!!

A recent trip to Sam's Club taught me that monitors and HDTV sets are merging into
pretty much the same thing. You'll just feed your laptop video to a much larger screen.

 

[nomadcowatbk]

Plus, it's pretty well assumed that consumers who were going to purchase HDTVs have already done so. The HDTV market is nearly played out. Manufacturers realize this and are now working on the "next big thing." 3DTV is proving to be a bust but maybe, just maybe, consumers will bite when SHDTV with its 2160p picture eventually rolls out (the other thing they're working on is an Super HDTV with a 4K resolution picture).

Probably by that time, broadcasters will have migrated to ATSC 2.0 or 3.0 and the tuners in our current HDTVs will have been rendered obsolete anyway.

A lot of people will not be replacing their 15 year old 27'' inch tube TVs until they break. Certain brands of tube TVs will be working long after they are obsolete.

 

[nomadcowatbk]

It's hard to imagine watching a football match or a film together as a family on a laptop!!

A recent trip to Sam's Club taught me that monitors and HDTV sets are merging into
pretty much the same thing. You'll just feed your laptop video to a much larger screen.

Most web streams do not have the some quality and frame rate of HDTV

 

[BMR]

It's hard to imagine watching a football match or a film together as a family on a laptop!!

A recent trip to Sam's Club taught me that monitors and HDTV sets are merging into
pretty much the same thing. You'll just feed your laptop video to a much larger screen.

Sure. But at what point does that larger monitor become a 'television'?

Turning it around, most of the latest PVRs have fast processors and large hard disks and can be connected to the web for catch-up TV. At what point do they become 'computers'?

 

[LKellerIII]

Plus, it's pretty well assumed that consumers who were going to purchase HDTVs have already done so. The HDTV market is nearly played out. Manufacturers realize this and are now working on the "next big thing." 3DTV is proving to be a bust but maybe, just maybe, consumers will bite when SHDTV with its 2160p picture eventually rolls out (the other thing they're working on is an Super HDTV with a 4K resolution picture).

Probably by that time, broadcasters will have migrated to ATSC 2.0 or 3.0 and the tuners in our current HDTVs will have been rendered obsolete anyway.

A lot of people will not be replacing their 15 year old 27'' inch tube TVs until they break. Certain brands of tube TVs will be working long after they are obsolete.

I don't know about that. In the months leading up to the switch to HD - I saw a lot of tube TVs abandoned on the sidewalk. Sadly, that's the way many people now get rid of old broken or obsolete appliances where I live (San Francisco). But there were so many of them abadnoned at that time, they couldn't have all been broken. I'm sure many people with the financial means upgraded to HDTV even though their tube sets still worked just fine.

We're 50/50 - got an HD set for the living room, but still have the old tube set (watched maybe 3 hours a week) in the bedroom.

 

[FreddyE1977]

maybe, just maybe, consumers will bite when SHDTV with its 2160p picture eventually rolls out (the other thing they're working on is an Super HDTV with a 4K resolution picture).

The technology keeps advancing. The resolution of the pictures just continues to get sharper and clearer.

Unfortunately, our eyesight does not.

 

[landtuna]

Certain brands of tube TVs will be working long after they are obsolete.

A month or so ago I finally donated my RCA 25" tube TV. I bought it in 1979 for $500 and it never needed a repair the entire time I owned it.

I still have a 46" rear projection big screen (purchased in 1987). It needed the replacement of the audio board some years ago but otherwise also works perfectly.