Slashdot Mirror
YouTube TV Costs $50 Per Month After Another Price Hike (engadget.com)
YouTube TV isn't immune to the latest wave of rate hikes plaguing the streaming world. From a report: The Google-owned service has announced that it's raising the base monthly price to $50 ($55 if you subscribe directly through an Apple TV), effective immediately for new subscribers and from May 13th onward for existing customers. You'll at least get something for your trouble, though, as YouTube TV will finally offer a host of additional channels.
You now have access to eight Discovery channels that include the original as well as Animal Planet, Food Network, HGTV, Investigation Discovery, MotorTrend, TLC and Travel Channel. Oprah Winfrey's OWN channel is coming later in 2019, and Epix's movie-oriented channel is available today if you're willing to spend extra.
You now have access to eight Discovery channels that include the original as well as Animal Planet, Food Network, HGTV, Investigation Discovery, MotorTrend, TLC and Travel Channel. Oprah Winfrey's OWN channel is coming later in 2019, and Epix's movie-oriented channel is available today if you're willing to spend extra.
The Pirate Bay is free -- $50 is almost basic cable pricing territory. What a joke.
Is this the same thing as what YouTube Red used to be or is this something new? Is this the only way to get YouTube premium shows like Cobra Kai or can you subscribe to the exclusive content by itself?
This shit is getting expensive, complicated, and consumers can't keep up with all the different options and how they keep changing. At this point cable looks a whole lot simpler and that means these streaming services aren't doing their job. It's as fragmented and ridiculous as cable packages if not more so.
Seriously who wants that brain-dead agitprop piped into their house at all?
Especially racist OWN network.
Is it just me, or is the $50/month some sort of mythical sweet spot for monthly content subscription service bundles like this? Why does this sort of outdated âoebundlingâ approach continue to be so popular? Do consumers actually want this?
Parmasean Cheese. It's what's for dinner.
I'll pass. 50 bucks, lol.
These companies just don't get it, do they?
Give me an option where I can choose exactly what channels I want, and exclude the channels I don't want, and I'll be more than happy to pay for it.
I want a single place where I can have a single bill, not 17 monthly bills from 17 different services. I don't even care if the cost is the same. I want the simplilcity.
Well it's not going to cost me $50 a month. What is the point of having these services like youtube and hulu tv if they cost you just as much as a cable tv subscription if not more. You have to add in the cost of the internet to get your total cost. I think a lot of "cord cutters" over look this and that is what they want you to do.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Sounds like all the shite I never watch and don't want
We didn't ditch cable to end up with the same nonsense in streaming. I don't want access to eight Discovery channels. I might be interested in, say Animal Planet. On the other hand, you know where you can stick OWN.
NO BUNDLING, PEOPLE! I want to pay for what I want to watch. I do NOT want to pay for what I despise, which I am not going to watch anyway. Ergo, Google, you know where you can stick your YouTube TV.
It's definitely time we start rounding up television business executives. Do not hesitate, show no mercy. Do what must be done. Remove them from society in a final solution, but just for decency, but for our very genetics.
I just don't see the benefit of paying for this through Youtube. Sounds like they are charging cable prices for cable service, and a substandard cable service at that. Yes you can get it on the go. Though I suppose coming from a household where we don't have any paid TV based entertainment my opinion may be a little jilted.
Seems to me the value is being lost here. Sure, more channels -- but variety is the main selling point cable companies use as a justification for high prices.
If it goes up any more, people are going to start thinking about replacing that cord they cut.
I was on the $40/month DirecTV now with 105 channels. It went up to $65 a month which was too much for me. Why can't we do a cafeteria plan? Give me ABC, CBS, NBC, HGTV, ESPN, and that's it. I don't want anything else. I don't even need DVR capability, I just need my login to the tv provider to work to OAuth into the various channel apps so I can do their shows on demand.
- Vincit qui patitur.
Captain Midnight was right. It gets funnier every time the prise rises even more. In a few years Youtube TV will cost over a $100.
captcha: caviar
Though I rip DVDs and Blurays of movies and TV shows. The price I pay stays the same as a one time purchase. Still if people want to pay to have subscriptions all over the place that's their money. I'm fine myself since storage options are cheap and a media player doesn't need a super duper SSD but a simple platter drive running.
[insert link to the oft-referenced article on the onion]
The awesome thing abut video streaming is that at last I don't have to pay for a collection of channels I mostly hate.
So why on earth are companies trying to go back to a world where they bundle a bunch of crappy channels together with a handful that are good? Who is going to go for that, when you also have the option to just get good single channels, or indeed to just pay for the one show you actually like from a channel, one time?
It's not like I was a YouTube TV subscriber to begin with but I am mystified who considers subscribing to this with so many other options to be had.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
What I celebrate most in YouTube is the death of the channel. I've never "subscribed" to one damn thing.
Obviously, if you find someone who produces smart content, it's nice to be able to browse that person's back catalogue. But you can do that with Andy Warhol, too, and he never had a "channel", he just had whatever he had made up to that point.
Channels are the natural domain of lazy, content-consuming slobs. Honestly, should what you watch next be a function of your recent viewing history? Only if questions pertaining to fresh material remains insufficiently answered.
But many people seem to prefer the girl-next-door algorithm. If the girl-next-door to the girl-next-door is even prettier, you continue to incrementally change your address: hill-climbing algorithm, one back-yard fence at a time.
Or you could head to a street cafe in the center of Paris, and skip all these silly "channel" increments.
my limit is $25 per month - cable used to fit in this limit back in the 90's but they moved on to $$$$ and I moved on to other services
Oh, people pay for an Internet connection now. Subscription sites with prices like this will get hosed and they will learn the hard way.
If Google wanted to play this right, they'd start selling an Internet connection with a YouTube TV subscription for 50 bucks.
wow oprah channel cant wait to see more oprah
I was on the fence about ditching Hulu (w/ Spotify) and Netflix for Youtube TV but this increase in cost threw that out the window.
Maybe it's a financial nightmare to negotiate prices with networks for channels when everyone wants their own custom bundle. But the industry has had plenty of time to figure it out and/or come up with something other than paying 10.99 for every individual channel or streaming service or just the same cost as paying cable tv. They already have the data on what channels/shows are popular. Start somewhere, anywhere. Just go a different direction than what cable tv is today.
I am pretty sure we can expect Apple TV also be more expensive then people will be willing to pay. Even Netflix has had some serious churn in subs since raising its rates. Let's not forget that paying for Google TV subscription doesn't include paying for the internet connection to access it. Unless your willing to sacrifice content to save money, I don't think streaming content is really that inexpensive.
Do you seriously think this offends me even a little, or that anyone with a brain reads your reply and thinks "oh, yeah, I agreed with that flippy guy at first, but once an AC called him a faggot, now I don't?"
More forced channels in base rate. game steaming may end up the same way.
$60/mo base for EA, Disney, Activision Blizzard (wow as an added change), paradox games, etc as the base and you must by base to add on things like cd projekt red.
When all these streaming services, I told myself that the max I would spend on any of them $1/day, so about $30/month. Unsurprisingly, I'm not subscribed to any of them anymore. Passive entertainment just isn't worth much more than that.
Cell phone service gets the $1.50/day treatment.
I hate fat people.
And still no Comedy Central, MTV, Nickelodeon, VH1, or any Viacom channel.
I'll vote with my wallet : I'll just watch OTA channels to keep up with local news (we have only 4 OTA channels here). Read more books. More time for my hobbies : country dance (line and partner), gardening, house renovations, ... Found new hobbies...
Will $CURRENT_YEAR be the year of the Linux Desktop?
If your primary customer is someone who is trying to be frugal with their entertainment spending ( a premise that I don't feel is all that far fetched for youtube ), then raising your prices to make your benefits irrelevant seem particularly stupid.
No wonder "cord cutting" has plateaued. It's bone headed decisions like this. But I'll tell you something; the more you antagonize your customer base, the more they realize they don't need what you're selling.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
I pay $108.99/month for cable TV. That's a lot, I know, way too much for most of y'all. But here's why I do it:
- The wife and I enjoy watching sports. There currently is no way to get all of the available sports channels from a single streaming provider that I currently get with my cable provider. PlayStation Vue comes close at $50/month, but it is missing a bunch still. DirecTV now charges you MORE for the package that includes all of the ESPN channels than what I pay for cable!
- Most streaming plans limit your stream count. YouTube TV limits you to 3. DirecTV Now limits you to 2, but you can pay an extra $5 for 3. PlayStation Vue is the best at 5. I have 3 TVs in regular use in my house, sometimes up to 6 when college games are on. These streaming plans won't let me do that.
- Using HDHomeRuns with CableCARDs, I control my content. I can record and watch non copy protected shows however I want, so long as I have software that'll do it. I can run MCE Buddy and automatically cut commercials out. I can fill up as many hard drives as I want. I can stream recorded and live content remotely using whatever app I want. You can't do that with streaming services.
- Everything is dependent on your Internet working. You can't record anything. At least if/when my Internet/cable TV goes out I can still watch my locally recorded content. Yeah, unlimited DVR is nice, but it sure sucks when you can't get to it.
- Streaming plans uses your bandwidth. I don't have a bandwidth cap, but I sure feel for those who do. Watching cable TV doesn't touch my Internet bandwidth unless I'm streaming my content elsewhere, and that's the way I like it.
I fully understand the status quo won't last forever, and one day my setup will become obsolete. For now, though, I get more bang for my buck than I would get trying to pay various streaming providers to get what I already have.
The whole point of the internet is to take control of what you consume rather than have 150 channels shoving the same ad into your private space.
Just watch regular old YouTube for free. Honestly, the self produced content is a lot more interesting than that Hollywood crap.
Haha, these companies really don't get it. All they are doing is pushing potential customers away. I am only in my 30's and because of prices hikes in the past I cut TV service years ago. I haven't had a TV service at home other than a Roku for like 7 or 8 years. I don't miss it, TV is largely crap. Any TV show or movie I want to watch by and large I can get off of Google or Amazon for a one time fee. Just by not paying for cable these 7 or 8 years I've saved about $5k, more people should do this!
Greedy much?
I think what offends me the most is the google's notion I should pay a lot of money to have my time wasted. Not just the google, of course. Facebook is clearly the #1 abuser of engagement.
(Still an open contest for #1 abuser of personal information, but we suckers can't even tell who's "winning" because they hide our own personal information from us. If I had to bet, I'd wager on Amazon to out-rape the others, but I might take Apple or Microsoft if you give me some points.)
As things stand now, I think I'm watching too much TV, but at least I'm not paying too much for it. I actually regard it as a sort of scam. The local cable company has a kind of pre-wired apartment deal with local apartment owners. The owners get to advertise their apartments as having "free" cable TV and Internet, but the REAL plan on the cable side is to up-sell the tenants to premium services. Laugh's on the cable company. The unpaid services are sufficient for my needs and excessive for my available time.
Then again (on the extreme other side of the topic) I might consider paying for about 1 hour of HBO per week, but that isn't HBO's business model either. I actually checked this story to see if the google was selling HBO as part of the package. No mention here, and not enough interest to visit YouTube with the question.
So the final answer is "No, thank you YouTube, and I do hope you implode ASAP."
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
I dropped cable TV, and had to pickup both Youtube TV, and Direct TV Now so that I could get Viacom (Comedy Central) and the Discovery properties.
DirectTV Now has dropped Viacom for new subscribers, but I am still grandfathered in.
With this announcement, I can drop Direct TV Now. I don't watch Comedy Central enough to justify the charge. YouTube TV delivers a better image than Direct TV Now, as well as has a better DVR capability.
I'm a fan of this service. It's the only one that has all my local channels and it works well on all my devices. They are getting close to the maximum price I'd consider paying, and they'll be closer to the front of the line to get cut next time I get around to cancelling services at this new price.
That's a 44% price increase (from the $35 grandfathered price) for a bunch of crap we wont watch... on top of already subsidizing sports channels that we don't want. Guess it's time to "cut-the-cord" again.
Is internet access included or do you have to get it separately?
you can get HBO on it's own!
did youtube and google just totally miss the whole point of chord-cutting is people getting sick of feeling like they're paying for shit channels they never watch?
"But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
-- Joe
We've let Disney and about 5 other companies buy up every single TV station, news station, media outlet and franchise on earth. And we're not stopping them from further consolidation. The point is that you won't have a choice unless you want to drop out of pop culture entirely. Which sounds good on paper but makes you seem like a weirdo who can't relate to normal people.
I actually remember it being a bit of a problem for my kid in high school. When all the other kids were talking about such and such TV show she couldn't watch it because we were too broke for cable. It made it harder for her to socialize. TV and movies are, for non-nerds, a social thing. I know it's hard to understand that on a site full of nerds. We nerds evangelize our favorite shows but we don't usually hop on bandwagons. I only saw it because I saw it so many times with my kid. I remember she hated Twilight but read the books and watch the movies just so she could stay in line with her friends. As an outsider that seems nuts, but it's the reverse, it's what the "normies" do.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
To be worth $50. I pay less for cable, gigabit internet, tv in a package.
Thatâ(TM)s what everyone thought they wanted, right? Right?
Be careful what you wish for.
Did I stutter?
Or were you simply too lazy to read all the way to the third paragraph?
Or did you merely forget to say something useful about HBO's financial model? Perhaps you could have corrected my ignorance? LOTS of ignorance here, and you could have asked if you were unsure about which parts of my ignorance apply to HBO.
Or did you just have nothing to say, but lacked the self-control to say nothing?
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
...how?
Simple. Do you remember back when traditional media was laughing so hard at the thought of downloading music? And when CD and traditional media was dying slowly, but surely?
Do you remember when news became more popular on the internet than the printed Traditional media?
Do you remember why Netflix succeeded? Because they put YOU in control of what you see and when you want to see it. Same with the original youtube, the idea was the little person being able to share their experiences, life, friends with the world. If they had an idea, they could produce it themselves and upload it, and it would instantly become available to everyone.
In traditional media - this kind of freedom would be unthinkable, simply because they are used to a controlled audience, professional actors, journalists and other media professionals - all one big payroll machine, a club of people who "made it" through the censorship. It was a comfortable club of a life with good pay, friends who had the same social status as you, had the same schooling as you, background as you - and a safe job in the spotlight or not (depending on the position) for life.
They had guaranteed funding, either from the government, or by advertisement where they had TOTAL control of what gets published or not, no competition whatsoever. This also meant they could basically decide what you'd like to watch, because there weren't other alternatives.
They also had a much more sinister power, the power of information distribution. Traditional media has always conveyed to the public that they represent neutralism and honest journalism, but history has shown us over and over again, it's paid media - paid by our officials and those with money enough to control the influence, and them being the trusted traditional media - they don't really want to give that power away, without a world war class fight, this has been a comfy place for a certain amount of people - over 100 years.
Now - in less than 10 years, all of this changed so fast that the big boys didn't even know what hit them, people stopped buying traditional media, because they had tons of new alternatives. Sure - you didn't get in-debt journalism, you often had to sift through 1000s of hours of amateur-garbage, but this grew too - and people soon realized they could earn money on their content too.
For traditional media - this is a disaster, they KNOW this is the final nail in the coffin, and they're prepared to fight tooth and nail to cling to life - and they're about to actually do that.
HOW?
Did you see what happened in E.U not one month ago? A certain law was passed that would change personal journalism, free media and almost every independent youtube channel for all future. Same with free media on the internet. Just because most people slept during the class, the bill passed and traditional media won big-time.
What traditional media haven't counted on though, is that they're essentially digging their own grave. With the onslaught of planned programming, planned advertisement, and mind numbingly stupid content... we as the public, just got a taste how freedom really tasted like (I'm talking about the early era You Tube), we know what it feels like to just watch whatever we feel like - live in the moment so to speak.
I for once, find it nearly impossible to watch TV after this, even listen to radio in my car. I never turn it on anymore, because I know it's just going to be endless amounts of Casino / betting ads or loan offers, and the little content there is - will be 80's reruns (albeit I love the 80's) it's cheaper to push, and they already own all the licenses to all of this music anyway, remember - they're basically owned by the people BEHIND traditional media.
But it's going to be a breath of fresh air - literally - just entertain ourselves with things we really should be doing, learning something, going outdoors, talk more with friends - and just watch whatever you want to, whenever you want to. I also have a HUGE Dvd collection,
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
I still think it's a good deal if you plan to use the multiple accounts and DVR. But it's just not worth it to me, we'd need 3 accounts, 4 once my youngest gets older, and we wouldn't use the DVR much.
Cable companies bundle because large companies own many channels.
You want Channel A but not Channel B? Too bad, both are owned by FooCorp and they don't sell "just channel A" to any cable companies.
Then there are weird pricing models like where a broadcaster will offer discounts to the cable company based on total number of channels sold and whatnot. That broadcaster might have 10+ channels or so, and each one goes into that metric. So getting one of those channels might cost you $2 and all 10 would cost you $6 and you'd say "I only want the one, I only want to pay $2 not $6", but if enough people say that, the cable company gets bumped to a much higher rate because they aren't selling enough channels so instead of $2 for that one channel it becomes $8 for that one channel.
As ugly and complex as cable bills appear to be, they are about a thousand times uglier behind the scenes.
Why pay a company known for lack of ethics (Google) to provide a service (TV) at the same rate as landline based companies (Cable)? Not to mention the quality of the service is probably better with the landline companies (Comcast).
I truly wish I was being ironic.
I think I’ll be happier with the dollar.
L'Idiot
I do not agree with you now
I have a brain with a PHD and a Master's degree and I thought it was funny as fuck. Usually a bunch of retards screaming fag is juvenile, uncalled for, or downright hateful, but then you have a moment like this. A moment where the stars align, the hairs on your arms start to tingle, and BLAM! the lightning strikes, followed with an epic and perfectly synchronized slow clap by the entire cast of Dawson's Creek.
You may have a great point. You may be "correct". It doesn't matter one fucking bit. The post wasn't specifically about you, numbnuts. That's a direct quote of what the asshats in charge will say. They don't care. You'll bend over and take it. You boycott them enough and they'll get their fees legislated into being. They'll get that money. They'll get yours specifically if you piss them off enough because they know you're thier whiney faggot whore.
I have a PhD, and that was a sick burn. You have zero credibility now.
- First step is to put a low price akin to dumping and using funds from other venue to keep it that way
- Once competition die off, raise price to match previous companies price
Monopoly achieved.
Same way with Uber with any local taxi companies, once they die off and regulation will take place, they will cost as much as previously. But this time all the money will get to a single company.
Have destroyed free ruku site. about to delete it.
Prices are set based on what the market will bear.
One person primarily benefits from this all: David Zaslav, the CEO of the Discovery networks.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/1...
Oh, he helped Oprah start OWN, and Discovery has a majority stake in OWN at this point (so he OWNs it as well):
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/0...
I have YouTube TV and like it. I'm not sure what the alternatives are around this price point and feature set (DVR and on-demand are well implemented). These new channels are not compelling, but more repelling.
This is why we can't have nice things...
BlameBillCosby.com
paid tv will be dead soon. how many young people do you see ever buy cable or even these streaming services. if it was not for my dad i would not even have paid tv.
Seriously? I gave up quality TV when it hit that price, I certainly wouldn't pay that for YouTube!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Wojcicki
Fake religion Fake people.
https://twitter.com/superzar2000/with_replies
Worse than the sideshows is that Donald Trump is aiding and abetting Israel to subvert USA en totale.
Sooner you wake up the less harsh the remedy has to be. Judaism is the belief in deceit. Burning bushes with laws and a boat made by a 500 year old man that saved 2.0 of all animals on Earth. This is why they get fucked up. Nobody trusts or likes liars or crooks.
Speaking of a YouTube price spike huh
Hi guys.
I'll pay for 50 channels when the deal includes 50 screens to watch them on and another 49 heads, so I can assign one of my heads to each channel. Also a time multiplexer and get rid of this sleep thing.
Enough with the joke already. Why would any sane person pay to have his valuable and limited time wasted on such a gigantic scale?
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
That's rich. If you do have a PhD, you probably got it from The Springfield Diploma Mill. (Did they misprint the PhD with a capital "H" on yours? Maybe you should get a refund.) Also, if you did manage to get a master's degree (which is not a proper name and should not be capitalized) I suspect that was awarded to you for passing a canine obedience class after bribing the instructor. Of course, not being accustomed to using these terms commonly result in errors like those seen in your post.
So, you are either lying, ignorant, or both.
I suspect both.
Now Youtube TV costs more than when I first started paying for satellite. I canned Dish last year because the price had creeped to to over twice what it was when I started, and I was getting fewer, worse channels for the cost.
I don't think you read his answer, he said "you can get HBO on it's own!". Now you know, so consider your ignorance corrected.
I am guessing around 8.
But I would honestly want to know.
YouTube free has way more interesting content than 90% of what those networks offer. Rather than watching things that are running at set times you can watch what you want when you want.
Sorry but I dont really see the advantage of network TV anymore...
if they add it I'll switch from sling
Deduct the $1 and ditch that channel. It's useless anyway.