Sports networks are driving up the cost of cable and streaming

Yesterday, I mentioned that the cost of local channels had contriubuted to the increase in cost for cable, and for major streaming services. I didn't say much about the other thing that has driven up the cost of pay TV: sports, particularly ESPN.

The rising cost of content, particularly sports channels, is the main reason for the significant price increases in cable TV and streaming services since 2010. Cable networks are demanding more money to compensate for decreasing subscribers, leading to higher prices even for services without sports channels. This struggle has also resulted in frequent blackouts on various platforms. The conflict is likely to persist as cord-cutting continues to affect the cable TV industry.

It's also affecting streaming services. For example, the most popular live TV streaming service is YouTube TV. It's $73/month, and that's one of the cheapest services. Hulu+Live TV, Fubo, and DirecTBV Stream cost even more. Only Sling TV at $40 is cheaper, of the services that carry sports programming such as ESPN.

Compare that to Philo, which is only $28, and includes no sports, but a lot of entertainment content. Frndly TV is even cheaper, although its lineups is smaller than Philo.

If you want local channels and major sports, you will have to spend at least $40/month, if you have your own TV antenna. If not, you'll have to spend at least $73/month. Is that difference worth the content? That's for you to decide. If you don't watch sports, or can get local channels with an antenna, you can save a lot of money streaming.

My Streaming Life doesn't cost that much. Yours may not need to either.