When cord-cutting first gained popularity in the early 2010s, it promised a revolution. Fed up with expensive cable packages full of channels they never watched, consumers sought out a more affordable, streamlined, and on-demand experience. Enter streaming: Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime Video—and later, Disney+, Max, and countless others.
For a time, it worked. Dropping cable and opting for one or two streaming services offered major savings, greater flexibility, and a user-controlled viewing experience.
But a decade later, the streaming landscape looks dramatically different. With subscription prices on the rise, content being split across multiple platforms, and ads making a comeback, many are beginning to ask: Is cord-cutting still worth it?
The Early Days of Streaming Freedom
Initially, cord-cutting meant liberation. Consumers could break free from bundled contracts and watch what they wanted, when they wanted. Services like Netflix provided a large library of content for a fraction of the price of traditional cable.
The economics made sense. Instead of paying $80 to $150 a month for hundreds of channels—many of which went unused—viewers could subscribe to Netflix for $7.99 and stream thousands of shows and movies. It was leaner, cheaper, and more intuitive.
This model disrupted the TV industry. Cable subscriptions dropped year after year. Streaming, once a secondary option, became the dominant way many people consumed entertainment.
The Fragmentation of Content
As the streaming boom continued, media companies realized that instead of licensing their content to Netflix or Hulu, they could launch their own platforms. The result? Fragmentation.
Now, instead of finding everything in one or two places, viewers need multiple subscriptions to access their favorite content. Want to watch Stranger Things? That’s on Netflix. The Mandalorian? You’ll need Disney+. The Last of Us? Subscribe to Max. And so on.
This shift has reintroduced a problem that streaming once solved: overpaying for access. Only now, instead of paying one cable bill, viewers are managing and paying for half a dozen subscriptions, each with its own billing cycle and pricing model.
Rising Costs Across the Board
Streaming services were once celebrated for their low prices, but those days are quickly fading. In recent years, nearly every major platform has increased its subscription fees. Here’s a snapshot of some of the changes:
- Netflix has raised prices on multiple tiers, with the standard plan now over $15/month in many countries.
- Disney+ introduced an ad-supported tier, while also raising prices on its ad-free version.
- Hulu, Max, and Peacock have all followed similar paths—raising fees while offering cheaper, ad-filled options.
When you tally the cost of four or five streaming subscriptions, plus internet, you’re often looking at a monthly total equal to or even higher than a traditional cable bundle.
The Return of Advertisements
One of the original draws of streaming was the absence of ads. Today, many platforms are reintroducing commercials—unless viewers are willing to pay more for ad-free access.
- Netflix, once staunchly against advertising, now offers a lower-cost plan with ads.
- Disney+ and Hulu both have dual-tier pricing, with the base plans including advertisements.
- Even YouTube, a free platform at its core, frequently pushes users toward its premium ad-free subscription.
This move signals a shift toward profitability over user experience. While ad-supported tiers help keep costs down, they also blur the line between streaming and traditional TV, where interruptions were the norm.
Is Live TV the Last Stand for Cable?
One reason some viewers have stuck with cable is for live television—especially sports, news, and real-time events. While streaming has made inroads here (with services like YouTube TV, Hulu + Live TV, and Sling TV), these options often come with hefty monthly fees.
Moreover, blackout restrictions, latency issues, and regional licensing challenges still plague streaming-based live TV. For sports fans in particular, cord-cutting isn’t always a clear win.
However, innovation is closing the gap. More leagues and networks are exploring direct-to-consumer models (like NFL+, NBA League Pass, and ESPN+), allowing fans to bypass traditional cable entirely—though often at an additional cost.
Subscription Fatigue and Viewer Burnout
In the golden era of streaming, content was king. There was always something new, something binge-worthy, something viral. But now, with so many options and so many services, subscription fatigue has set in.
Consumers are growing tired of managing multiple accounts, navigating varying interfaces, and trying to remember where a particular show is available. The result is choice paralysis—having so many options that it becomes difficult to choose what to watch at all.
This complexity, combined with rising costs, has led some users to re-evaluate their choices. A growing number of households are rotating services—subscribing to one or two platforms for a month, binging content, and then canceling before moving on to the next. It’s a savvy workaround, but also a symptom of a fractured ecosystem.
Are There Still Savings?
So, is cord-cutting still worth it from a cost perspective? The answer depends on a few key factors:
- How many streaming services you useIf you stick to just one or two, you’ll still likely save money. But if you subscribe to five or six, your bill may rival a traditional cable package.
- Your tolerance for adsChoosing ad-supported tiers can reduce costs significantly. However, this might come at the expense of your viewing experience.
- Your need for live contentIf you’re a sports fan or someone who values live news, you may still need a live TV solution—often the most expensive part of any streaming setup.
- Your willingness to rotate subscriptionsStrategic subscribing can maximize value and reduce costs, but it requires effort and planning.
Alternatives and New Models
Some consumers are exploring alternative models like free ad-supported streaming platforms (FAST), including Pluto TV, Tubi, and The Roku Channel. These offer a mix of live channels and on-demand content at no cost—though with frequent ads.
Others are returning to physical media or digital rentals to avoid subscriptions altogether. Buying a favorite show on Blu-ray or using platforms like Vudu to rent a movie as needed can sometimes be cheaper in the long run—especially for occasional viewers.
Final Thoughts: A Changing Landscape
Cord-cutting isn’t dead—but it’s no longer the silver bullet it once was. The streaming revolution brought undeniable benefits: convenience, choice, and a more user-centric model. But as services grow more expensive, more fragmented, and more complex, the lines between streaming and traditional cable continue to blur.
Still, the flexibility and personalization of streaming remain unmatched. If viewers are willing to adapt—by rotating subscriptions, tolerating some ads, or exploring new platforms—they can still beat the system.
The era of simple cord-cutting may be over, but a more strategic, customized version has taken its place. Whether that’s “worth it” depends less on price alone and more on how you watch, what you value, and how much effort you’re willing to invest in navigating an ever-changing entertainment world.