YouTube Unveils YouTube TV, Its Live TV Streaming Service (techcrunch.com) 95
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: After a year of rumors, YouTube is finally drawing back the curtain on its latest play for entertainment industry domination -- a live TV service. Distinct from YouTube Red, the new service YouTube TV, which has been in the works for years at Google's internet video behemoth, has quietly been inking contracts with media companies to distribute their content on its TV service. The service is fairly low-cost, with a family of six accounts available for $35 per month, and no long-term contract required. Earlier reports from the Wall Street Journal set pricing for the service somewhere between $25 and $40 per month. However, it will only launch in markets where it can offer full, live local broadcast feeds. That's planned for the months ahead, but YouTube didn't offer an exact date. "We decided to create an offering that would give them all of these can't miss live moments," said YouTube exec Robert Kinsel of YouTube TV's offering. He explained that YouTube has partnered with all of the broadcast networks, in order to offer "comprehensive national coverage with ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox all included." In addition, the service is getting USA, FX, FreeForm, MSNBC, CNBC, Fox News, and Fox Business. ShowTime is available for an additional fee. Missing, however, is HBO. For sports fans, the service includes national coverage from ESPN, FoxSports, and NBC SportsNet. Also offered are regional sports networks from Fox and Comcast, SEC Network, Big Ten and ESPNU. Fox Soccer Plus is available as an add-on. In addition, YouTube TV includes YouTube Red's 28 original series. Some other features of the service include a DVR that will never run out of space and that's cable of simultaneous recordings, a visual TV guide, search feature, and voice support integration via Google Home.
$35/mo is not "fairly low-cost"... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
$35/mo is not "fairly low-cost"... for something that was 100% [free] twenty years ago.
I'm not sure when a service with an unlimited DVR was ever 100% free. Who cares if I can get broadcast TV for free with an antenna, who watches TV programs other than sports live anymore? And for live sports why would you want to watch without the ability to pause?
Even for those who are willing to put up with those problems in the 21st century, you should at least understand why most people don't want to.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that's very expensive for television channels that are broadcast over the air for free, and currently on a model that is totally funded by advertising. Obviously these streams will also have advertisements, because the programming itself cannot even fill the entire timeslots. I bought an amplified TV antenna from Walmart a few days ago for $32 and I can get more than a dozen channels (and I'm an hour from the nearest TV station). So I would be paying $35 a month to be watching it through the pipes I
Re: (Score:1)
But these aren't just broadcast stations. In addition to ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, CW broadcasts there is also the cable networks that are owned by those same companies like SyFy, Disney Channel, ESPN, FXX and other cable networks like USA and NatGeo. You aren't paying $35 for OTA stations, you are paying $35 for a cable package that includes the OTA stations.
Re: (Score:2)
So... Cable TV. Online. (Score:3)
So if you want to pay for cable TV, but would rather pay Google and get it online? Possibly over a cable modem? Woo?
I guess I don't get it.
Isn't cable-cutting going in the opposite direction? I mean, this has got to be a real kick in the balls to the telecoms. Competition from Google is going to be expensive. It cost them a lot to starve Google out of the ISP business. But isn't the trend of customers going AWAY from buying this sort of thing?
Is $35 cheaper than cable TV?
Re: (Score:2)
Is $35 cheaper than cable TV?
You must live outside of the US. Cable TV is far more expensive than $35 per month, especially for a service which allows you to DVR shows. Most cable packages are 2x-3x more expensive.
But you can get much more for less (Score:2)
I believe with Comcast I can get local channels for $10/month.
The cable package is more, yes, but I also get a lot more channels too. How many channels would you get with the YouTube thing?
Regardless $35 is way, way too much money for what they are providing (yes even "with DVR service" as people here keep bringing up). Netflix is vastly cheaper and offers better content. I would argue that with Netflix alone you get MORE new content in a year than if you had access to all the major broadcast networks!!
Re: (Score:2)
You must live in a very different area than I do. Limited Basic with Comcast, by itself, is $23. Plus a $5 broadcast TV fee. Plus Taxes. By that point, you're very likely past $30.
I was thinking additional, not standalone. (Score:2)
To clarify I thought it was $10 more than my internet alone. Since the internet is mandatory (esp. for YouTube!) but TV is not...
Re: (Score:2)
I believe with Comcast I can get local channels for $10/month.
The cable package is more, yes, but I also get a lot more channels too. How many channels would you get with the YouTube thing?
Regardless $35 is way, way too much money for what they are providing (yes even "with DVR service" as people here keep bringing up).
If people are bringing it up the DVR feature that should tell you that comparing a basic [non-DVR] cable package to this YouTube service is not a fair comparison. 10+ years ago people organized their life schedule around the TV show times, but ever since TiVo came out people want to see TV shows when it fits into their life schedule and the market shows they are not willing to sacrifice that convenience.
Netflix is vastly cheaper and offers better content. I would argue that with Netflix alone you get MORE new content in a year than if you had access to all the major broadcast networks!!
I have Netflix and it's great, but it's limited to Netflix content, and lacks a lot of the major broadcas
Switch that around (Score:2)
I have Netflix and it's great, but it's limited to Netflix content, and lacks a lot of the major broadcast network content,
At this point is it not more fair to say broadcast networks lacks Netflix content? There is far more I am interested in watching on Netflix now than on broadcast networks - and here I am only talking about Netflix own content!
And like I said, they are producing content FASTER now than any broadcast network, or I think even the combination of them.
The very few shows I might want to watc
Re: (Score:2)
There is far more I am interested in watching on Netflix now than on broadcast networks..[lots of opinions about your personal TV viewing]...
Your opinions make sense to me and my personal viewing is probably similar quite similar to yours; however the larger market shows there is a demand for network content. Whether that makes logical sense or not is irrelevant... it is what it is. Streaming companies will attempt to cater to the real demands of the market.
...So ALL the $35 deal is really about is watching live content i.e. sports. Way too steep for my blood...
I don't care about sports either, so I personally agree with your opinion, but again the larger market overrides our personal opinions. There is very large portion of the market for whom liv
But even sports is covered (Score:2)
I agree that the larger market wants sports. but if you like sports enough to pay $35/month pretty much just for that, why would you not get something like a NBA or NFL or MLB yearly pass? Those are around $100 or so generally, for a whole YEAR - and you get to watch every game, including many the networks do not carry (for MLB) along with a lot more live stats stuff if you use the apps.
Re:But you can get much more for less (Score:5, Insightful)
I haven't read the details, but the key for me would be how many viewers does it allow at one time? If it only allows 1 viewer than its not worth it. If it allows 3 it would suit my family needs and I could save a lot of money.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the summary says 6 accounts, so that would be my guess. But I'm also too lazy to read TFA (welcome to Slashdot).
Re: (Score:1)
It allows six. Each with their own individual DVR.
Details I don't know but would like to: Will it work if you're outside of your area? If so, how far? What about traveling outside of the country?
Re: (Score:2)
Where do you live? Because I want to move there. Is that $20 each? Or for all three? Even at $20 each, that's insanely cheap compared to most places in the US. :(
Re: (Score:2)
Greed must be out of control in the US. I have TV/Phone/Gigabit for $20.
There, now it's accurate.
Re: (Score:2)
What are you gonna stream that $35/mo subscription through, genius?
Your neighbor's wi-fi?
He said cheaper than cable tv, not cable internet, genius. Internet is an expense you will have regardless of if you choose cable tv or youtube tv.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I'm just not a customer.
I'm not so much a cable-cutter as young and techy enough that I never got cable TV.
Re: (Score:2)
is google providing the pipe for the 35 bucks as well? if you still have to pay extra for cable company non bundled service then pay google... maybe not.
eventually it will all conglomerate as usual with monopolies.
Re:So... Cable TV. Online. (Score:4, Interesting)
Cable is usually limited to the home--I can watch TV on my phone while sitting in my house, but I lose pretty much all the worthwhile live channels if I'm using WiFi or Cellular service.
So if I have unlimited cellular, I can still get my local channels. I can conceivably shop around for the best/cheapest dumb-pipe Internet service and then pay $35 for YouTube TV. That might be less expensive than "Basic Cable TV" from the local Cable company.
One question I have: Will I get local channels depending on where I am (i.e., KCBS in LA but WCAX in Burlington, VT)? Can I choose what affiliate I want regardless of where I am? Time zones? Can I watch "Agents of SHIELD" at 7:00PM Pacific Time rather than waiting until 10:00PM when it would air on my local ABC affiliate?
Re: (Score:2)
Cable is usually limited to the home--I can watch TV on my phone while sitting in my house, but I lose pretty much all the worthwhile live channels if I'm using WiFi or Cellular service.
Comcast is pretty good these days. You can view a lot of live channels outside the home. You can watch your DVR recordings outside the home, and even pre-download them to your mobile device. You can watch / download most on demand content as well.
You can't watch most live broadcast channels outside the home (but oddly, you can watch DVR recordings of broadcast channels outside the home).
Re: (Score:1)
Aren't those the same times?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Is $35 cheaper than cable TV?
Without knowing their lineup it's impossible to answer.
Not 5 minutes ago I priced going down to internet-only service from Comcast. It was $91/mo for the same speed I get for $149 w/ a TV package. So yeah, I'm paying $60 just for TV. That being said, it's a pretty comprehensive TV package and I doubt YouTube's $35 lineup will come close. Sounds like they are aggregating content that you can already get online from different sources (ESPN, ABC, Showtime, etc).
As much as it pains me to say, Comcast is not too
Could be much cheaper if you share streams (Score:2)
Is $35 cheaper than cable TV?
Google/YouTube is offering streams on up to 6 devices under one account. If your household doesn't need that many streams you could share with others and split the cost. For example, my wife and I share our Netflix account with our respective parents. My wife's parents share their HBO streaming account with us. Our houses are many miles apart. There's no difference in the service other than being limited to certain TVs/devices in our home. A very small sacrifice. So, with Google's 6 streams, two friendly ne
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, this has got to be a real kick in the balls to the telecoms. Competition from Google is going to be expensive.
Why would the ISPs care? Transfer caps, artificially limited transit and peering bandwidth, and zero rating can handle Google's video services.
ESPN reverse mirror with ABC or just blackedout? (Score:2)
ESPN reverse mirror with ABC or just blacked out?
Local NFL games or will that verizon only nfl get in the way?
Local news / sports or forced to view watch feeds? Even on O&O channels?
Full local RSN's?? Just your in market ones?
Nope (Score:2)
Remember Google TV?
Remember YouTube Red?
(Coming Soon: Remember YouTube TV?)
They can't even get any traction with Play Music / Movies / etc.
Every single new player into this space comes along thinking they're going to shake things up, but they end up offering the same fucking service because they're at the mercy of a few companies who control most of the networks. I'm not going to "cut the cord" and then use the same cord to get 80% of the shit I want across 3 separate subscription services, plus 50+ thing
Re: (Score:2)
The worst thing, one the hell would you pay to have bullshit commercials scream at you. I have gone largely commercial free (screaming idiot box commercials) and life does feel much better and when I do rarely come across that screaming bullshit commercial, I could not imagine anything putting me off a product more. Honest example felt like some KFC for a change (prior to watching commercial), saw a commercial for special on Tuesdays, thought OK, got caught with it again, it flipped to no thanks, got scream
Re: (Score:2)
Having translated your comment into English ("Maccas?" Seriously?) all I can say is that I'm glad I don't watch or listen to commercial anything any more.
Re: (Score:2)
Well at least you did write English and not American. There is more than one version of English you know, even ones where people can still spell properly, yeah I know America, where metric is just to complex and feets and chains still rule (perhaps they feel for the whole idea of 'imperial' units and slavery).
Re: (Score:2)
There is more than one version of English you know, even ones where people can still spell properly, yeah I know America, where metric is just to complex and feets and chains still rule (perhaps they feel for the whole idea of 'imperial' units and slavery).
Eh, England is provably less free than the USA, what with their ubiquitous Big Brother surveillance state, and they still use archaic units for common purposes as well. I was just watching a Top Gear rerun and a bloke stated that he was six foot five. You can hardly blame him, since saying you're a hundred and ninety seven centimeters or whatever it is doesn't really roll off the tongue, does it? I have the luxury of being just a whisker over two meters tall, so I can just claim two meters and it sounds gre
Re: (Score:2)
"Cable" is not "capable".
That's exactly what Google wants you to think!
Re: (Score:2)
It's almost identical to Sony Playstation VUE (Score:3)
...including the DVR feature and live local network channels in certain markets, but VUE has a few more channels, like AMC and Discovery ( https://www.playstation.com/en... [playstation.com] ). Stupidly, Sony linked the VUE service to the Playstation, which doesn't help people take it seriously and one had to have a Playstation to sign up until Sony very recently added VUE to newer Sony smart TVs. Google/You Tube aren't going to wall off their service the way Sony did.
Re: (Score:1)
I have PS Vue which I signed up for on my 4th Gen Apple TV (Amazon FireTV stick and some Roku devices work too). PS Vue is fairly easy to use without owning a Playstation. (Source: I use PS Vue and have never owned a Playstation).
Living in a rural area, I love the service. I can't get local channels OTA due to geography so I bundle that with the internet and use PS Vue for the premium stuff and sports. If YouTube gets my local OTA channels in for the same price I pay Vue, I'll switch in a heartbeat.
Re: (Score:2)
Approximately when did you sign up for PS VUE? Because I was eyeing up VUE for well over a year [debating/preparing to cut the cord], but until very recently the VUE service could only be initiated on a PS3, PS4, or Amazon Fire TV [box, not stick], but once you initiated on one of those devices you could access your VUE account on other devices (Chromecast, Fire stick, Roku, Android/Apple mobile apps, etc.). I bought a new Sony smart TV in the fall and it wasn't until around December that an update added a
Uhh (Score:1)
Commercials (Score:3)
If it has commercials, I wouldn't watch it even if it were free.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you also skip movies because of product placement?
Re: (Score:1)
Do you also skip movies because of product placement?
That is an apples to orange comparison. commercials interfere with the flow of the programming by pausing the program, showing a bunch of commercials then picking up the program where it left off (unless its live like sports). Product placement doesn't interfere with the flow of the programming.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If it has commercials, I wouldn't watch it even if it were free.
Thank god for the magical content fairy that allows people to make your content without spending any of their own time or money. Otherwise those people would have a hard time making a living!
Not horrible, but not worth it... (Score:3)
Any chance I could get, say, two of those channels for $5 a month?
There's internet-based cable packages already out there, SlingTV/PlayStation Vue are the big obvious ones, but it's not unlikely to be more crowded going forward either. They have the same granular pricing scheme, and I don't care for them either..
The big thing for me is that when I was paying for cable, I'd only really have a couple of 'veg out' channels I ever used, and would really prefer to watch entire series for the serialized content, rather then live, so got nothing out of having those channels available. Add those few remnants of what's mildly interesting in cable, and you'll secure a (lower value) longterm customer.
I won't be willing to pay $35 monthly for what I'm missing now though. I just don't get enough enjoyment out of that, dollar for dollar, than I'd get out of most anything else.
Ryan Fenton
$35+$60=$95 (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
the service is getting USA, FX, FreeForm, MSNBC, CNBC, Fox News, and Fox Business. [...] the service includes national coverage from ESPN, FoxSports, and NBC SportsNet. Also offered are regional sports networks from Fox and Comcast, SEC Network, Big Ten and ESPNU
Sure glad I have an antenna on the roof and TiVo in my living room and can get all that for 100% free.
First, none of the channels mentioned in this quotation of the summary are available through a rooftop antenna. They are exclusive to multichannel subscription television. Second, a TiVo DVR will not function without a TiVo subscription.
Re: (Score:2)
Pays for itself over time.
Wow! You mean you make money sitting on your ass watching TV?
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, no I'm not being pedantic. It's great you convinced yourself such, but paying $549 (the current "all-in" plan price) for the right to download a small amount of data every week isn't a good deal.
By comparison, for $549, you could pay for a medium-tier cable plan for 6 years that includes internet and cloud DVR and slingbox-like ability to play the content anywhere.
$200+$550=$750 (Score:2)
a TiVo DVR will not function without a TiVo subscription.
secondly you pay ONCE for lifetime program guide on TiVo and never have to pay again for the life of the box
The price of a $200 TiVo DVR and its required $550 All-In Plan will pay for at least a couple years of cable TV, particularly if your cable provider offers a "double play" bundle that includes TV for only $240 per year more than Internet-only service, and particularly if the DVR breaks soon after its factory warranty expires.
what is TV? (Score:2)
is that like YT/Twitch, except you cant select what and when you watch it?
Split it with 5 friends? (Score:1)
Since it gives access to 6 accounts for $35/mo, I feel like it's a pretty decent deal if you split it with 5 friends. Comes out to less than $6/mo per person. That seems pretty good.
Is this allowed in the terms, though?
Sling TV (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In addition, the service is getting CW, USA, FX, FXX, Syfy, FreeForm, MSNBC, CNBC, Fox News, Fox Business, Disney, Disney Jr., NatGeo, Sprout, E! and others.
Will give Playstation Vue a run for its money. (Score:1)
Geo Blocking? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even if it does, VPN is your friend. Just set up a VPN (OpenVPN or whatever) at your house for her, et Viola!
Channels WTF ???? (Score:1)
Channels....BAH.
Thanks but no thanks, but for less $$ I will stick to Netflix and watch "Programs" when I want, as I want, Where I want and all advert (and google tracking) free.
Whats next the "Google Buggy Whip" ?
USA only I suppose? (Score:2)
I watch YouTube because I can't stand TV (although I do watch a few PBS shows, but they are on YouTube)
There's already more things on YouTube that I'd like to watch than what I have time for: https://www.youtube.com/user/H... [youtube.com]
Utter crap. (Score:1)
Pay $35 a month, support republicans via fox news, and pay the espn tax. Avoid this crap. Just let us subscribe to the channels we want. Or better, one monthly fee and let us pick the shows from any/all channels. I want to watch what I want, not what you want me to watch.
The grail (Score:2)
Broadcast TV? (Score:2)
I'm turning 42 this year (so I will soon be the answer) and I was under the impression that broadcast TV was for only old people. I wonder what old people would do with this.
Now if rednecks and hillbillies also do broadcast TV, then this make sense.
Of course, I wonder if there's anything that broadcast TV offers that you don't get with alternative options other than commercial interruptions.
Re: (Score:2)
Broadcast television is that thing where you get an extremely limited selection, you don't choose when things start, and only have an option to pause or rewind if you insert a DVR into the loop.
Oh, and generally it's around 33% unskippable advertisements.
If you're not offering a massive library of on-demand material (including a lot of new material), there wouldn't seem to be much point for a 'broadcast television' streaming service outside of sports... which this service doesn't include.
$35 per month? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This seems to me like the only way to get live sports online, though, right? So if you were somebody who wants to cut the cord because $120/month for cable is retarded but still wants sports, this is attractive, no?
Comment (Score:2)
So... it includes CBS. Does that mean I could watch the new Star Trek show on this service, in the US?