YouTube TV Is Adding More Channels, But It's Also Getting More Expensive (theverge.com) 79
YouTube's internet TV streaming service is expanding its programming with the addition of several Turner networks including TBS, TNT, CNN, Adult Swim, Cartoon Network, truTV, and Turner Classic Movies. YouTube TV is also bringing NBA TV and MLB Network to the base lineup. NBA All Access and MLB.TV will be offered as optional paid add-ons "in the coming months." The downside? The price of the service is going up. The Verge reports: Starting March 13th, YouTube TV's monthly subscription cost will rise from $35 to $40. All customers who join the service prior to the 13th will be able to keep the lower $35 monthly rate going forward. And if you've been waiting for YouTube to add Viacom channels, that still hasn't happened yet. Hopefully these jumps in subscription cost won't happen very often. Otherwise these internet TV businesses might suddenly start feeling more like cable (and not in a good way). The Verge also mentions that YouTube TV is adding a bunch of new markets including: Lexington, Dayton, Honolulu, El Paso, Burlington, Plattsburgh, Richmond, Petersburg, Mobile, Syracuse, Champaign, Springfield, Columbia, Charleston, Harlingen, Wichita, Wilkes-Barre, and Scranton.
Huh? (Score:2)
Re:Huh? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: Huh? (Score:4, Funny)
. I'm glad I got rid of all my cable and direct TV stock, that money is now invested .. very differently.
It's bitcoin, isn't it?
Re: (Score:3)
You just made me double-check what we're paying and what we're getting. Already planning a saturday outing to the local cable branch to talk to them about WTF, how the hell did that creep up so high?
The good news is that every couple of years when we do that, and bring the old hardware with us, they somehow manage to hack down the price, hook us up with the better hardware, and add new services. Corporate helldesk line? Fucking abysmal. Local folks? Cheerful helpful, and generally awesome.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of times the /base/ price is about the same, but then they nickle and dime you for HD, DVRs, etc. And then on top of that often the low pricing is just introductory and then goes up after a year, and you're locked into a year or more contract. Also, cable companies always seem about a decade behind the times when it comes to user interfaces on their crappy set-top boxes.
I was on Dish then SlingTV (plus a few others to get the specific channels I wanted) and then switched to YoutubeTV once their Roku a
Need a new law named (Score:4, Insightful)
We need some kind of new law, that states something along the lines of :
"Any collection of video will eventually expand until it costs $50 a month to access, and contains only 5% desirable content".
Re: (Score:1)
Youtube wishes it could get to 5% desirable content.
Re: (Score:2)
5%? You're an optimist, aren't you?
$35 is already more than I pay for actual cable. With more channels. Which are also full of crap.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm still waiting for you to finish the bag of dicks you promised to eat. I need to return the bag for the deposit.
Re:Pay for what you want.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Twelve or so years ago my buddy set up a SMATV headend [wikipedia.org] for a new prison (rack mounted, one DirecTV receiver for each channel on the system) and I got to see the price breakdown. ESPN was far and away the highest priced channel, by about a 4:1 ratio. Also, in that case the total monthly charge for a channel was based on the number of beds, not displays. In other words, an eyeball based fee.
IoT may bring that fee schedule to us, instead of Dad yelling about the lights or the thermostat or the mobile phone bill it will be "Don't look at the TV!"
Re:Pay for what you want.... (Score:5, Informative)
I've got a hunch there are some channels that they get paid to place in the lineup. If so, letting you drop those would actually hurt their bottom line. Then there are channels that cost them so much that they simply must charge everyone for them or they would not be able to offer them to those that do want them, due to costs.
Yup, that's exactly how it works - some channel owners pay providers to carry the channels, while the "top-tier" channels are considered must-have and so it's the other way around: the providers pay for the right to carry the channels, and then more often than not there are groups of channels owned by the same company and the rights for them are negotiated as a group. For years, Disney + ESPN (especially ESPN) were considered must-have cable channels, so not only did providers pay for for the "privilege" of including ESPN, they paid a ton for it - easily 25% or more of the fees providers paid for their channel lineup went to ESPN.
ESPN's success is why there has been a proliferation of new cable sports channels, and it's a big part of why ESPN has been weakened so much. But the deals are so valuable and complicated that they end up being deals with a very long duration. For example, Comcast and Disney hammered out a deal in 2012 that remains in effect until 2022 (see https://mediadecoder.blogs.nyt... [nytimes.com]).
Incidentally, the long duration of these deals is also a major factor in why the TV industry has been moving so frustratingly slow for end users: people were wanting to e.g. watch TV on their computers or phones long before it was allowed because few of the business deals had provisions for anything online. It's not hard to imagine that in 2020, if ESPN is still alive, viewers will be frustrated by some inane restriction due to the fact that the content rights were negotiated way back in 2012. :)
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah well... (Score:2)
Call me when they go global.
Do not want. (Score:5, Insightful)
YouTube TV is also bringing NBA TV and MLB Network to the base lineup. NBA All Access and MLB.TV will be offered as optional paid add-ons "in the coming months." The downside? The price of the service is going up.
Did Google miss that the reason lots of cord cutters "cut the cord" was because they were sick of paying for sports networks they had no interest in?
Re: (Score:2)
You need to re-read the first sentence of my quote, bro.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Do not want. (Score:4, Interesting)
Did you miss the part where they're optional paid add-ons?
Why don't you read what I quoted again, and the channels listed very carefully.
Pay more for less! Evil included! (Score:2, Insightful)
So what's the benefit of this compared to regular cable?
Does it have automatically removal or skipping of commericals? Nope...
Does it have on demand viewing? Nope...
Does it have offline viewing? Nope..
Does it have à la carte? Nope...
Does it have more channels? Nope...
Does it have all local channels? Nope, only the main ones... but I guess most cable companies do this too and don't carry the sbuchannels
Re: (Score:2)
It lets Google compile your viewing preferences and assimilate that into all the other data they have on you. Some people apparently consider that a plus, as they like targeted ads.
Same as it ever was (Score:2)
So YouTube TV is $40/mo. Which doesn't really replace Disney's $5/mo for ESPN plus, at least for sports fans.
Amazon subscription pricing (for reference, I don't recommend them):
HBO - $15/mo
Cinemax - $10/mo
HBO + Cinemax - $22/mo (a $3 savings!)
I could fill this post with all the various subscription streaming services
By the time very middle man has gotten their cut, I'll be paying 2x more than cable form this "cord cutting". I think cord cutting mainly works for people who pirate or w
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not terribly impress with Netflix's selection of movies for streaming.
Netflix and Amazon are producing their own series. It's really hit and miss, and I'm not impressed. Some of the series Netflix produces received some of the worst reviews in recent history. (Fuller House, The Ridiculous 6, and many others)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
sports-related username
Nope, sorry to burst your bubble. It's for the laundry detergent that comes in an orange box.
I only know the rules of hockey and tennis well enough to follow along. Gridiron football is a mystery to me!
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not terribly impress with Netflix's selection of movies for streaming... Netflix and Amazon are producing their own series. It's really hit and miss...
I kind of agree, but for the prices (even though they do creep up, one has to watch that) I think the original content is pretty decent. Certainly good enough to make me choose that over traditional cable TV.
Re: (Score:2)
Netflix is more about original content at this point.
https://www.netflix.com/origin... [netflix.com]
What do I watch?
Movies: I like horror.
* The Babysitter was the most fun movie I've seen since Evil Dead 2 (Satanism!!!).
* Death Note should have been rated R as it was too creepy.
* 1922 was messed up (a son helps his father murder the mother).
TV shows: Ozark, Stranger Things, Narcos, those are the ones I've liked the best.
And offline download which I use a lot, all of their original stuff is portable.
Re: (Score:2)
I think cord cutting mainly works for people who pirate or who watch so little TV that the dregs on Netflix are sufficient.
That's pretty much me - I watch, maybe, a couple of hours of "TV" a week; usually that's a movie, and likely as not it's one that's not even streaming. I subscribe to Netflix streaming mostly for the kids, Netflix DVDs mostly for my wife and me, and Amazon Prime because I'm using it anyway. For the Olympics/Super Bowl/other big live TV stuff, I have an old media center PC hooked to an antenna. I'm just about to replace that PC with a new OTA DVR thing (Channel Master Stream+) which looks like it will do the
Typical post-2007 Google product (Score:5, Insightful)
Instead of what we want, which is a la carte access to certain shows and movies, they want to sell us cable television over the internet. Brilliant. Hopefully no one falls for this.
Antitrust cannot reap Google too soon...
Re: (Score:1)
Instead of what we want, which is a la carte access to certain shows and movies...
To be fair, that is probably not entirely Google. Various companies don't just own one channel. That would be, well reasonable. They instead own a lot of channels and will often say, well if you want this popular one, you have to buy all these others.
It would be interesting if a law was passed requiring all cable or similar services to be a la carte. A lot of crap channels would be lost pretty quickly and probably some good stuff too. Still, I think its worth the risk.
The last time a la carte existed w
another product is kill (Score:1)
F that noise. (Score:3)
The whole point of the interwebs is I consume what I want (pull) not what an ad exec wants me to watch (push.)
Re: (Score:2)
Yawn (Score:2)
The moment Youtube forces me to pay for anything, that's the moment I stop using Youtube.
It's 98% trash anyway, it's not like I'll lay awake in bed losing sleep over anything Youtube does or doesn't do.
It's the tragedy of success...as soon as something becomes popular it starts to go downhill and gradually turns to shit. Sometimes not so gradually.
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't Youtube (like the website), it's a TV service (like Dish or DirecTV).
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't Youtube (like the website), it's a TV service (like Dish or DirecTV).
Double-yawn.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously whether or not you find YoutubeTV interesting makes no difference to me one way or another; I replied to your comment only because you seemed to misunderstand what the service was. Anyway, have a great day!
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you; my apologies if my response was rude or ill-considered. I'm sometimes a little more terse than I should be.
Amazing (Score:2)
The amazing thing to me is that anyone is willing to spend $35 a month on Youtube.
I hate sports passionately (Score:2)
Might as well go back to Cable (Score:2)
With the cost of home internet + all the online streaming services (youtube, hulu etc), you might as well just get cable + internet from your cable provider. They'll usually give you a discount for bundling them together and if you complain they'll lower your rates.
Re: (Score:1)
What is youtube TV? (Score:2)
Is it just the same as having cable? But you watch TV through a youtube 'app'? ...
If so, what is the point? TV is rubbish, too many ads, show play when i can't watch them, can't binge series, too many bad shows/realitytv,
Who wants this and pay $40 for it?
Only Chrome (Score:1)