YouTube To Offer Subscription Service This Week

jfruh writes "According to an email from a Google spokesman, YouTube will be offering a $1.99/month subscription service as early as this week. This service will 'bring even more great content to YouTube for our users to enjoy and provide our creators with another vehicle to generate revenue from their content,' though there was no indication of what content will be offered through the service exactly. YouTube has offered rentals for specific videos before but this is the first time the service would go head-to-head with subscription services like Netflix."

Ads

[Teppy]

I'd definitely pay $2/month to remove the damn ads. Same goes for Hulu - why don't they have this option?

Re:Of course not

[rudy_wayne]

It seems clear that the basic YouTube service will be free. The pay service will be for premium content.

"Premium Content". I laugh every time I hear that phrase.

What exactly would this "Premium Content" be? What do they have in that crappy little window that is so wonderful and "Premium" that I will gladly pay them for it?

Re:Ads

[slashmydots]

If you look at Hulu's gross income as a company vs # of subscribers times the subscription cost, you'd be paying A LOT of money to not see ads. Hulu is basically a miniature TV channel where the per use cost is low and the ad revenues are everything. Netflix is like a horrible business plan that only picks up worthless, awful movies and horribly outdated TV shows then throws in one mega hit once in a while to attempt to impress people. Really, neither work. At $1.99 instead of Netflix prices, Youtube cannot possibly afford to offer anything of value.

Re:Of course not

[HaZardman27]

TV shows and movies I would suspect.

Re:Ads

[Xemu]

I'd definitely pay $2/month to remove the damn ads. Same goes for Hulu - why don't they have this option?

It will go the same way as cable. First you pay $2/month to remove the ads. Then you pay $4,$8,$16 and then they put the ads back in as well.

Re:Youtube streaming sucks.

[Anonymous Coward]

Blacklist your ISP's local mirrors.

Re:Ads

[dzfoo]

I think he meant it has nothing that anybody wants to pay to watch. It's popular right now because it's free, but cat videos may not pay the hosting service by themselves.

Re:Ads

[Seumas]

I'd pay $2/mo to get rid of all the "featured" panels on the interface and all the juvenile crap from teenage morons that cater to a massive mouth-breathing audience of children (I keep seeing shit from guys named Fred and Tobuscus and Pewdiepie and other crap all the time). For that matter, dump all the "boobs and brain-dead response videos" crap and I'll definitely pay $2/mo for what's left.

I primarily watch stuff like lectures from Stanford, hardware demos, high end hardware builds being benchmarked, etc. Yet, what do they keep spamming me with? Fucking idiot teenagers spending 20 minutes showing you how to do your makeup or spending ten minutes showing you everything they just bought at the mall (seriously, this is apparently a whole genre of videos now).

How can a company with such a claim to targeted advertising now get this shit right?

Re:Ads

[dunezone]

Because if everyone started using Adblock these websites would disappear or force people into a subscription. A large portion of their operating costs are supported by the advertisements that Adblock will block.

Re:Of course not

[BasilBrush]

Sport seems the thing that an awful lot of people are prepared to pay stupid money for.