Couple on sofa with TV remote

Report: DIRECTV NOW, Sling TV, PlayStation Vue, & Others Should Have 15 Million Subscribers in 2020


Live TV streaming services are growing rapidly. Led by Sling TV, which now has more than 2 million subscribers, and followed closely by DIRECTV NOW, which has just over 1 million, and the rate of growth is picking up speed.

Now we get a look into the growth we are seeing with live TV streaming services thanks to the investment group UBS. According to a recent report from UBS, live TV streaming services should top 5 million subscribers by the end of December 2017.

The good news does not stop there because according to UBS by the end of 2020 there will be 15 million live TV streaming subscribers. If this comes true it would mark a massive jump in the number of subscribers going to live TV streaming services; however, it still means most cord cutters still do not subscribe to a live TV streaming service.

As best we can tell there are between 20 and 25 million cord cutters/cord nevers right now. Over the next few years, that number is likely to rapidly grow along with the growth of live TV streaming services.

With growth like this it is understandable why so many companies are trying to jump into live TV streaming services. Even if you can get just a fraction of this market it will be a massive payday over the next few years.

Are you a cord cutter who does not subscribe to a live TV streaming service? Leave us a comment and let us know why you don’t need a live TV option.

Source Business Insider 

Please follow us on Facebook and Twitter for more news, tips, and reviews.

Need cord cutting tech support? Join our Cord Cutting Tech Support Facebook Group for help.

  • Mark D

    Lets not ye forget Philo !

    • Fred Koot

      Or Spectrum

  • Greg Roberts

    Antenna gives me live tv, but I’m about to try YouTube’s tv

  • RubberBoloney

    We still don’t have full ala carte TV. But at least we aren’t being held hostage by regional cable TV monopolies like Comcast, AT$T and Time Warner. .

    • Dean G

      Unless you are willing to pay $5 per channel, you are never going to see a la carte.

      • Celtics_Junkie

        I’m willing to pay $5/channel. I only watch 4-5 channels

        • RubberBoloney

          That’s what the cable companies want you to believe. I don’t.

          • Me

            Then you’re naive. If say TNT is getting $1.50 per sub because 100% of Cable subscribers are paying for it in, then in an al a carte world where maybe only 25% are willing to pay for TNT do you REALLY think TNT is only going to charge $1.50-$2? The math doesn’t work. TNT is NOT going to take LESS money. Also it should be clear cable companies don’t determine the price of the content the content owners do.

          • Marc H

            I agree, people don’t realize how expensive that would be. Only a very few people who only watch very particular shows would sign up for that. Channels would range from about $3 to $20. Most probably 5-7 range unless they find another way to subsidize them.

        • Me

          And there will also be a base rate of $25. You’re not getting cable for $10 a month. NOT happening. Or the cable company will jack up rates on other things like equipment or truck rolls.

  • TexMarque

    OTA-DTV suits me just fine, all the linear TV that I need or can view. Anything else can be viewed on DVD from the library or a VOD streaming service. Any thing worth monetizing won’t be held captive in a walled garden for long, video doesn’t really age well.

  • Darrell Birkey

    I suspect that the 15 million figure is very low. With speed growing and choices growing, cable and satellite gets less appealing

    • bellsfolly

      I think you are spot-on…as more and more people see friends, relatives, co-workers etc saving tons of money and not giving up the channels they want, that number is going to mushroom over the next year or two. It wouldn’t surprise me if wasn’t double their estimate by 2020.
      And like you, I spent many, many years with a satellite (DTV) because where we live, that was all that was available. Having cut the cord nearly 2 years ago now, we’ve never been happier. More and better choices, watching more shows on OUR schedule, and without commercials…and spending roughly half of what DirecTV was charging. Not looking back!

      • Marc H

        15 million out of how many?

        • bellsfolly

          I think there are roughly 100 million cable and satellite subscribers currently in the US. Am guessing they are saying that we’re going to continue seeing a shift to live-tv streaming services.

  • Darrell Birkey

    After having cable or satellite for over 40 years, I recently tried Playstation Vue and decided to dump the cable. For many years I have had Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime and the MLB streaming package on my Roku players, now I even use the Plex server on Roku to watch and record OTA channels.

  • The Shadow

    Still paying for cable TV? Silly you. You either have a lot of money or you don’t know the options. Between an antenna for from $40 to $70 and / or streaming, you could save hundreds in the first year. 😇

    • Me

      Not everyone can simply use an antenna to get in locals. Not everyone has access to decent internet. Or their internet has restrictive caps. And all of the OTT option lack something that cable TV offers. Not everyone is single and under 30 years old. One thing about cable is that it just works.

      • IBWTF

        Agreed but some of that is changing slowly as far as internet, channels & even the age preference. My parents are over well over 30 & cord cutting like me. I no longer have a data cap & now using unlimited internet via a reliable inexpensive hotspot internet plan. The channel variety is big, the gap of missing channels is getting smaller. You’re likely to find an OTT provider with at least 95% of the stations you want. Half of the shows that I watch are exclusive to streaming services. My service is as reliable as my Satellite/Cable was, it’s just more options. Who would have EVER thought that the landline would be running off of cable internet & Cellular data depending on the setup. Or even replaced by cellphones…

    • Marc H

      Cable is way more expensive and a much easier experience. I come to this site to monitor the situation so I can cut the cord when the tech is there, but it’s not close for me yet. I think it will be a while until it’s sufficient for me to switch, until then I will pay a premium for the convenience.

      • Butch McGee

        Agreed, I’m not convinced streaming will ever allow me to do want I can with my TiVo (4 tuners with the ability to download to the PC and process and burn to DVD)

  • Aj Brown

    The issue is cost. Do we need cable TV? No? I’d keep it if I could get it for $50 – $75 per month for most of the channels and stop charging us for each box and HD fees, regional sports fees and all that other BS. In my area, my basic Comcast is $20 per month for basic 20 OTA channels, but then you have add $10 per box, and $10 for HD, then $14 in fees. So you are up to $65 dollars for basic cable. And for $10 more they can sell you the package for 12 months. Comcast, start listening to us, we want cable TV, but we want to pay less.

    • Marc H

      It’s not comcast its the content providers. What cable companies have is convenience. The streaming companies are catching up to that, but they will not match it in the foreseeable future. People will pay a lot for convenience.

    • JD Campbell

      Don’t forget about DVR which they usually charge $10-20 for.

      • Aj Brown

        Did even want to bring that up… 🙂