Cord-cutting isn't as simple or economical as it seems

Cord-cutting is all the rage these days; you see it everywhere you go. In protest of rising cable costs and shady hidden fees, people are flocking to SlingTV, DirectTV Now, and YouTube TV, and they had a valid reason. These packages let you choose what you want (within packages) and only pay for those things. For awhile, it was a great alternative.

DirecTV and SlingTv are trying to convince people that cord-cutting is both cheap and useful

The problem is: it is slowly losing its selling point which is affordability.

With the announcement of pricing increases (which have nothing to do with their recent need to fund an $85 million+ purchase), ATT has brought DirectTV Now up to pricing parity with competitors Sling and YouTube at $40 per month (base pricing). Now, while this may look considerably cheaper than the $80+ some pay per month for cable, there is a lot to take in to consideration.

For one, you have to look at what you are actually getting. $40 may be cheap, but you are really not getting a ton of channels. If you don't need a lot of channels, great. However, what happens when your favorite show moves to another channel you don't have? That means it is time to buy the bundle to include that channel; now, your bill is $55. Your kids "need" to watch that new show they found, that's another bundle. Now your bill is more expensive than your previous subscription.

Is there still a lot to like about these alternatives? Absolutely. You get the flexibility of choosing what you really want, and you are never tied in to things you don't. However, let's not pretend that these providers are truly the cord-cutters dream they pretend to be. They are simply alternative options for those that don't want tied to a provider. Let's face it: the only real cord-cutting, price-slashing options are Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon.