YouTube TV, which costs $73 a month, agrees to end “$600 less than cable” ads
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
They keep adding channels and that seems to be closely related to the price change.
We use it, but I'd really like some ability to delete channels and pay less.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
Seems like a bold assumption to assume one only uses internet for TV?
Upvote
-2
(0
/
-2)
I have switched internet providers from evil bastards Comcast to slightly less evil T-mobile 5G. At least with the slightly less evil outfit my bill is what I expect it to be. Also FUCK COMCAST!
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
ReelGood and JustWatch say it isn't
But if you have Amazon Prime, you can watch James May: Our Man in Japan, which is a pretty good series following him around Japan. There is another season for Italy as well.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
"NO ADS" ... for now.
You can well bet those tiers will eventually include ads along with the announcement of new ad-free tiers that cost $8/month more, each.
The streaming enshittification continues.....
Upvote
8
(11
/
-3)
Here in Maine, the Spectrum TV alone is $137 ($115 + $11 for box + $12 for an odd channel). The innernet (would be needed to get the YouTubeTV) is $86 (I have alternatives but not compelling). I grant that the $23.20
Broadcast TV Surcharge supports legacy local broadcasters, does YouTubeTV pay that?
At the moment we are watching Maine Public TV, documentaries on the Ice Houses and the Scallop Ranch; NOVA later. Despite having a flock of towers all over the state, we can't pull-in MainePBS OTA clearly.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Perhaps Google was trying to put a monetary value on the ability to subscribe and unsubscribe from their service with a few clicks of the mouse, vs. the hell-show my father endured trying to cancel his Spectrum cable TV package. It's definitely worth something.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
Yes, streaming is getting more expensive and becoming cable light. I have Verizon FiOS and have noticed that the terms keep getting better probably because of all of the competition from streaming, so thank you for that. Verizon has gotten rid of all of the contracts so I can cancel whenever, and they are now throwing things in for free that I had to pay for a couple years back. So there's that.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
And in the top three most hated cable companies as well. I'm sure they'll try harder on that front too.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
When I dropped cable, I was paying about $150/month.
That was in 2010.
I suspect it's gone up since then.
I CURRENTLY pay ~70.00/month for 150/10 with unlimited data and subscribe to three video services which rotate every few months. that adds ~$45/month. So that's $110/month.
YouTube TV won't have the same content as the streaming services I get now, and costs almost twice as much as what I pay for streaming services now.
I don't see any incentive to getting it. And I sure as hell don't see any savings AT ALL by doing so.
I see another ~$75 bucks flying out of my pocket every month.
It would be nice if there were real-world penalties for lying in one's ads.
That was in 2010.
I suspect it's gone up since then.
I CURRENTLY pay ~70.00/month for 150/10 with unlimited data and subscribe to three video services which rotate every few months. that adds ~$45/month. So that's $110/month.
YouTube TV won't have the same content as the streaming services I get now, and costs almost twice as much as what I pay for streaming services now.
I don't see any incentive to getting it. And I sure as hell don't see any savings AT ALL by doing so.
I see another ~$75 bucks flying out of my pocket every month.
It would be nice if there were real-world penalties for lying in one's ads.
Upvote
0
(3
/
-3)
In any case, Google's new aspiration seems to be to reach price parity with cable. Then it will be a comfy oligopoly again for everybody, just with one additional snout to feed. But that can be solved by raising the prices accordingly in unison.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
I am not lawyer, but you would think that there would be criminal prosecution for the executives involved.
They knowingly conspired to engage in fraud via a bait and switch pricing scheme.
Their intention was to lie about their pricing in a publicly documented manner.
They knowingly conspired to engage in fraud via a bait and switch pricing scheme.
Their intention was to lie about their pricing in a publicly documented manner.
Upvote
-8
(0
/
-8)
I cannot strongly enough agree with this sentiment: Ironically enough: I do pay for YouTube Premium for this exact sentiment: No ads - Coincidentally enough: Yesterday my wife and I were talking about the preponderance of YouTubers inserting their own ads into their content - Usually, it's relatively related or even made to be a part of the content, but I've started seeing some "sponsorship" ads for something ridiculous like dish soap in a terraforming video.
On a recent vacation, I think I used the hotel TV less than 15 minutes, simply because watching commercials inserted into content every 8 minutes pretty much wrecked the experience (Yeah, yeah: Spoiled, I know, but at 51 years of age, I well, well remember the times when ALL TV content had ads interspersed like that and I refuse to go back to it)
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
With the way their price increases happen, its unclear if that will happen. They like to essentially institute a price increase the same month they announce it, which causes some issues, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them increase the price again in the next few months to 80 or 85 a month.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
I remember it being like $40 a month before the pandemic. It was such a good deal. I guess it’s still okay, but I can get by with streaming services and Pluto TV.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
How about while they're updating the code, they cookie my "No Thanks" choice for yttv and STOP ASKING ME EVERY SINGLE TIME I CLICK THE HOME BUTTON?
Upvote
3
(4
/
-1)
Doesn't Hulu charge you $20 extra per month if you want to actually be able to fast forward through commercials on DVR shows, or something like that?
EDIT: Looks like they dropped that at some point. Huh. That was a main reason I opted for YTTV over them, so maybe I'll give them another look.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Y'all act like cable isn't raising their prices at an even faster rate than Youtube TV is.
Which, of course, doesn't make YTTV's price increases any easier to stomach. It's just absurd to pretend that YTTV is, or likely ever will be, pricier than cable.
Upvote
-1
(4
/
-5)
Rumor is that Netflix is planning a price increase for after the SAG-AFTRA strike ends. Yes, another one.
I think that will finally be the straw that breaks the camel's back for me. I've been a Netflix subscriber since streaming came free with the DVD plan, but I'm just sick of the price increases, especially in a fragmenting landscape.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
JonnyOneNote
Ars Centurion
And YouTube TV would be a lot less cheaper if they would allow customers to choose whether or not they want the Fox-branded and ESPN and other sports-related cable channels. Those 2 companies (with their multiple off-springs) are the reason YouTube (and cable/satellite) keep raising their prices. That, and the Regional Sports Fee they all tack on, whether you are even interested in sports or not.
These channels (useless as they are to many subscribers) are part of every "Basic" package of every service. There's no way to opt out for these two companies' channels (and you do pay for them, believe me!)
Why not just lower the price and then make the ESPN/Sports an add-on package and all Fox cable channels another add-on? Let the people who watch them pay that carriage fee!
These channels (useless as they are to many subscribers) are part of every "Basic" package of every service. There's no way to opt out for these two companies' channels (and you do pay for them, believe me!)
Why not just lower the price and then make the ESPN/Sports an add-on package and all Fox cable channels another add-on? Let the people who watch them pay that carriage fee!
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
I had YT TV from 2018, when it was still $35 until they went to over $60 a year or two(?) ago without adding any benefit to me. To me, TY would be smart to include ad-free TY with the YT TV as a bundle. Maybe even include something else like extra storage for a Google account or something? I would seriously reconsider going back to YT TV if the provided such a bundle.
Instead, YT TV has gone from being a nice affordable alternative to just being a cord cutter version of cable.
Instead, YT TV has gone from being a nice affordable alternative to just being a cord cutter version of cable.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
I simply can not understand how anyone, anywhere, would pay SEVENTY THREE DOLLARS for YouTube!
Upvote
-10
(1
/
-11)
I have a suggestion for everyone here complaining that these services cost too much: Share your accounts. When they eventually log you out, have a few minute conversation and log them back in. This does not work with hulu tv. It does work with everything else and allows you to share the expenditures.
As long as you live remotely near eachother, it works.
As long as you live remotely near eachother, it works.
Upvote
-1
(1
/
-2)
Curious: when you add on the internet charges for them to get to Youtube TV, what are the numbers?
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
I'm not sure why that matters, unless they're using the internet solely to access Youtube TV. I'm sure they had internet access when they were using Cox for TV too.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
I think you're fundamentally misunderstanding the product. Youtube TV is a completely separate thing from Youtube. It's a streaming cable TV service.
Which is a thing that many people (probably most Arsians) aren't interested in having, but if you are in the market for cable TV, $73 is an extremely good price. It does beat the incumbent players by a significant margin.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
Its funny but true.
I do not have a lot of free time to watch TV.
Some networks let you watch free TV shows on their website for a few days after they air.
For example - Can watch the Young and The Restless for 7 days on Global after it airs - no account needed.
The app even lets you save favorite shows and records your progress on the show (for the device not account as no account is needed).
Between the networks offering some free streaming and free youtube I have more content than I could watch in a week let alone the hour or so I get a day.
The free streaming services just add more. If I want a classic western or horror movie - Tubi.
We cut the Prime subscription a few months ago and now don't have any paid streaming services.
No pirate flag needed.
My parents drop nearly 200 a month for cable. That's insane.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
What exactly do you get for 73 a month. Soon streaming will be more expensive than cable with more steps. Now you have to juggle multiple apps and subscriptions then the cost of internet service.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
YouTube TV is not wrong and here's why:
- Calculating the cable box is justifiable, I've had basic cable before without a box and you get very few channels and significantly fewer quality channels compared to having a box. I've checked and YouTube TV's base plan would require a box from a cable company for similar channels. It also notes the average cost, not a specific location.
- The fact that cable charges you a regional sports fee or something akin to that. Therefore if you are not someone who watches sports it's a further saving to go with YouTube TV if you don't have to pay a sports fee. That alone is about $150/yr, a quarter of the $600/yr savings they claim even if they didn't put in the sports package. I couldn't stand that about cable, being charged "fees" for things I nor anyone I know would watch, it's unjustifiable and one of the reasons I quit cable TV. YouTubeTV basic does still have sports channels btw and you can pay more just like with cable to get more sports channels. I see that it was a fair comparison.
Saying that, while the ad isn't perfect it is not egregious and I think their decision was influenced and biased or the board just didn't do their research.
Either way, I will not be getting cable, YouTube TV, or any other service like that until companies are willing to get competitive again.
- Calculating the cable box is justifiable, I've had basic cable before without a box and you get very few channels and significantly fewer quality channels compared to having a box. I've checked and YouTube TV's base plan would require a box from a cable company for similar channels. It also notes the average cost, not a specific location.
- The fact that cable charges you a regional sports fee or something akin to that. Therefore if you are not someone who watches sports it's a further saving to go with YouTube TV if you don't have to pay a sports fee. That alone is about $150/yr, a quarter of the $600/yr savings they claim even if they didn't put in the sports package. I couldn't stand that about cable, being charged "fees" for things I nor anyone I know would watch, it's unjustifiable and one of the reasons I quit cable TV. YouTubeTV basic does still have sports channels btw and you can pay more just like with cable to get more sports channels. I see that it was a fair comparison.
Saying that, while the ad isn't perfect it is not egregious and I think their decision was influenced and biased or the board just didn't do their research.
Either way, I will not be getting cable, YouTube TV, or any other service like that until companies are willing to get competitive again.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
So it should say save $219 if somehow you don't rent a DVR or set top box from the cable company, otherwise save between $400 and $600.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Its weird that Charter would try to use the LA market in their case (although maybe Google initially brought it up) because that market has a super expensive exclusive rights agreement for the Lakers and another expensive one for the Dodgers.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Because one pays for the ISP service, and then for Youtube TV. My ISP charges cover the Internet access and the TV services it includes, and I have not seen an economic case for me to change that to give more information about me to Google. I do pay for three other streaming services, also, and can cut bait on any of those at any time. For me, I see no value in the Youtube offering. If others do, that's cool. We choose our own utility.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Can't people in large parts of United States get over the air television? Either by satellite or VHF/UHF antenna. I understand that in some parts of the big city this might not work (with an outdoor antenna, but indoor antenna might work even at reduced signal levels). In many cases, buying cable in any form seems to be unnecessary in United States.
Upvote
-1
(0
/
-1)
I can, but when experimenting a few years go, two major channels are blocked due to trees between my place and Mount Wilson. Today, in my current residence, any antennae access I have would face to the Pacific, so have not bothered to try.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Assuming (reasonably) that one will pay for Internet service regardless, YTTV is essentially half the cost of Cable TV in my area... it costs $145/Mo to add Cable TV to my account with Cox. That's $864/Year more than YTTV.
I tried YTTV 4k for "free" during the Women's World Cup. Better picture, yes, but had to pay Cox an extra $50 for unlimited data; I watched almost every game.
I tried YTTV 4k for "free" during the Women's World Cup. Better picture, yes, but had to pay Cox an extra $50 for unlimited data; I watched almost every game.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
I'm not sure what ISP you use that gives you free TV service with the ISP service, but in the case of my ISP, the bill with comparable TV service bundled would be an extra $120 or so a month over what I pay for just internet. So yeah, Youtube TV still comes out ahead.
I haven't been paying Cox for the unlimited, and I still come in under the cap regularly even using YTTV. We're a 2-person household though.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Lucky. I pay $70 a month for just internet. The cheapest TV package worth getting (i.e. one that's not just stations I can get on antenna anyway and useless religious and shopping channels) would add $99 a month onto that, and then it's another $20 for the DVR. And then the hidden fees on top of that, and if I want to get service on the TV I have in the basement, that'd be extra too.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)