YouTube TV Jacks Up Pricing To Become Most Expensive Cable TV Alternative (usatoday.com) 154
On Tuesday, Google's YouTube TV announced a monthly $15 price hike, bringing its streaming package of channels to $64.99 monthly, from $49.99. "YouTube TV is now the most expensive of the cable TV streaming alternative services," notes USA Today. "When YouTube TV launched in 2017, it was $35." From the report: In a company blog post, YouTube defended its decision by announcing the availability of additional channels from Viacom, including MTV and Nickelodeon. The move is effective Tuesday for new members, while existing subscribers will see their rates rise after July 30. "This new price reflects the rising cost of content and we also believe it reflects the complete value of YouTube TV, from our breadth of content to the features that are changing how we watch live TV," YouTube said.
AT&T Now recently lowered pricing to $55 monthly, while Hulu with Live TV is $54.99. Sling TV is the lowest priced of the cable TV alternatives, at $30 monthly for the Orange or Blue packages, or $45 for both. However, Sling doesn't carry all the local broadcast stations in each market, so check your local listings. Philo is even cheaper, at $20 monthly, but is missing news and sports channels. A 2019 study by Consumer Reports found the average cable TV bill is $217.42 monthly.
AT&T Now recently lowered pricing to $55 monthly, while Hulu with Live TV is $54.99. Sling TV is the lowest priced of the cable TV alternatives, at $30 monthly for the Orange or Blue packages, or $45 for both. However, Sling doesn't carry all the local broadcast stations in each market, so check your local listings. Philo is even cheaper, at $20 monthly, but is missing news and sports channels. A 2019 study by Consumer Reports found the average cable TV bill is $217.42 monthly.
This model is running out of steam fast (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: This model is running out of steam fast (Score:2)
Re: This model is running out of steam fast (Score:4, Insightful)
My "budget" is zero dollars a month. I have the internet and I know how to watch video for free.
Re: (Score:3)
I would pay a couple of bucks to have ad-free YouTube but they don't even offer that. All you can get is the massively over-priced YouTube Red or Pro or whatever it's called now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Youtube Premium, and it's a whole $12/month or $18/month for a family. No ads on Youtube, offline content, streaming and offline music, seems like a pretty good amount of value to me compared to $65 for the TV stuff. Even before I signed up I found that my viewing habits had shifted towards the more focused content on Youtube, now it's 90% of what I watch. The other 10% is split between Amazon Prime video and Netflix.
Re: (Score:2)
Just the fact that it's cheaper in the US is enough to make me not pay for it. Why should I pay more than you?
Re: (Score:2)
Is it cheaper? I know in the EU/GB they price it with VAT included, but in the US the price is pre-tax so it might end up being about the same cost.
Re:This model is running out of steam fast (Score:4, Funny)
The ONLY reason I might do it is to watch Baseball, and there seems to be no reason to do that this year.
"This year?" :-)
[ Baseball is only slightly more exciting than televised competitive house painting -- the drying phase. :-) ]
Re:This model is running out of steam fast (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This model is running out of steam fast (Score:5, Funny)
Oh please. Try watching a cricket test match, that game is so exciting that even the players get bored and go home multiple times during the match.
Re: (Score:2)
Try watching a cricket test match, that game is so exciting that even the players get bored and go home multiple times during the match.
Test cricket has got a bit big, so county cricket is where it's at, and "watching" a match is an art in itself.
You should arrive with some deck chairs, a picnic hamper, plenty of pimms and a good newspaper. Basically it's a picnic in the park with something happening in the distance. The polite thing to do is to rouse yourself to applaud on a century before retiring under y
Re: (Score:2)
Based on my experience most people spend sleeping in front of the TV.
Re: This model is running out of steam fast (Score:2)
Try watching a cricket test match, that game is so exciting that even the players get bored and go home multiple times during the match.
Isn't going home the entire point of baseball? I always found it strange how excited fans get when a player runs there.
Re: (Score:2)
touche :-)
Re: (Score:2)
My cable/streaming bill for the month is zero, and has been for ages. If I want to watch:
There's really no need to pay for this when it's all out there for free.
Re: (Score:2)
No kidding. With the National League embracing the "Aging Employee Act" aka the designated hitter, I've totally said eff baseball anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
The great thing about this is that it doesn't cost me a penny. I have plenty of other things to do with my life and have no need to waste hundreds of dollars a year on blatant propaganda masquerading as "entertainment".
It's really amazing how easily it was for me to just walk away from TV completely. There are just so many things to do other than sitting there watching TV. As I got older (45 currently) I realized that it was just the same tired crap over and over anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
I do my computing in the lounge room. A custom overbed table holding the gear. I can not just watch the idiot box for very long at all and it is mainly just background to my time on the net, gaming, keeping up to date on the world, learning new stuff every day. So as background advertisements are out, I mean way out, feels like having some freak arsehole coming screaming into my lounge, just awful, it just leaves streaming ad free content or a library of owned content.
In my home advertisements can be seen
Re: (Score:2)
As I got older (45 currently) I realized that it was just the same tired crap over and over anyway.
That's about the same age I quit watching TV...I just got tired of it. I turned the TV off one day and never really turned it back on.
So, "streaming" is the new cable (Score:2)
Oh well, at least there is competition
Still get commercials? (Score:5, Insightful)
My only reason to sticking with some of the streaming services now, is that they don't have commercials; even if the cost is near the cost of "traditional" cable TV, the one advantage they've had is the lack of commercials.
I have, however, avoided those that do have any commercials, of any kind , which includes and "promotional" content within videos, be it "sponsors" being mentioned, or anything like that (if it's not directly related to the content, it's a "commercial" in my book - Patreon/channel-specific merch & stuff or the like excluded).
One thing YouTube videos are full of, is these "commercials", even if you're a subscriber. So if on top of the increase you still get commercials, then they've lost any hope of getting me to subscribe.
Re: Still get commercials? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I have, however, avoided those that do have any commercials, of any kind
Jokes on you then. Everything on TV is advertising something, whether they spell it out or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Commercials is the reason why I stopped my Amazon prime video subscription after a month. The content was nice, price ok and such, but the "Please watch this other thing too" that you cannot turn off was too much.
Re: Still get commercials? (Score:2)
Why not watch YouTube videos via a browser with adblock? That's what I do.
Samsung kindly provides me with numerous adblockers for their browser. Easy to install and use.
I'm totally with you though. First I stopped watching tv channels apart from BBC because they had no ads. That lasted for a decade until the BBC lost their way and became unacceptable due to politicking. So I stopped listening to their news and political discussions and kept on watched 3 shows. Then they ruined the best one (Top Gear) and a
Time to switch again (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. In fact I already had these channels and more with Philo. Of what they added, I only care about Paramount (already on Philo). Never watch the rest. Not sure where to, but we’ll need to switch. Fubo looks like a bargain now.
Meet the new boss... (Score:5, Insightful)
youtube is apparently now the same or worse than Comcast. About once a year I check my bill, and it has magically increased by about $25/mo, and I have to work at getting it back down close to what it was a year before.
Re: (Score:2)
Not a bad idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Have them send an ebill to your bank. Then either authorize automatic payments up to a specified amout or just review the ebills and send/schedule payments on your own schedule. There's no reason but the initial convenience to use a credit card for a recurring entertainment expense.
Who asked for this? (Score:2)
Like really, who asked for this?
Everyone has been asking for a la carte TV. People who do not want to pay for the rubbish channels. Like people who like anime or cartoons, are constantly ripped off by having to pay an arm and a leg for sports and low quality broadcast channels that they don't even watch.
These "package" deals are for people who have more than one family member in the house, and when it comes back to how many people can watch the streams, it's reflected in that cost. I pay for Netflix, but it
Re: (Score:3)
well who asked for it? americans apparently. by buying stupid cable packages that are 200 plus total per month.
also, what the f? 200 dollars, per month, for tv? no wonder americans end up homeless often as they don't know the value of money..
Re: (Score:2)
People want to pay less for cable. They assume ala carte will get them there. There's no evidence that will happen and no theoretical reason it should.
Re: (Score:2)
People want to pay less for cable. They assume ala carte will get them there. There's no evidence that will happen and no theoretical reason it should.
Well, we'll never know, because ala carte doesn't exist. I think it was Sling that pretended they were ala carte? Anyway, whoever it was only offered like two possible plans with some add-ons, which isn't ala carte at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My cable supplier has a minimum change of approx $50 per month. That give me a number of "points" that I can allocate to the channels I want (more than I actually need, at the time). If I want more channels, I can purchase extra "points" which I can use to add extra channels (individually). They used to sell "packages", so if you wanted a specific channel, you had to purchase the entire "package". Not so anymore.
And I can change which channels I want at any time. Pretty flex
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, $100 for internet, landline and cable is pretty standard even non-ala carte. That doesn't include "premium" channels like HBO or Showtime.
Re: (Score:2)
The networks, who own the content, are asking for it. Why would they take $5/month per subscriber for the good stuff when they can get $10/month for the good and cheap stuff together?
Extortion (Score:4, Insightful)
Just more extortion from the copyright cartels. Since they're having issues with cord cutters in record numbers, they're trying to extort more money out of cable alternatives for their 'valuable content' in order to keep the C-suite multi-million dollar salaries and bonus checks rolling in. They're even forcing the cable alternatives to bundle additional 'channels' into their packages so you can't avoid paying for content you don't actually want; just like cable.
Re: Extortion (Score:2)
Dont forget the 32 other loser channels that host unscripted shit like storage wars, pawn shop wars, toddlers and tiaras. All that lame fucking shit. You cant just buy the non-suck shit. You have to finance the losers who turn their kids into pageant whores, and then feign outrage when trump says shit like âthese girls will let you do anything, even grab them by their pussiesâ(TM). They turned their kids into whores and are mad when some rich guy bought into the product.
Dave Chapelle said it best
Re: Extortion (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah, that shits all scripted too. My parents know someone whose relative was on American Pickers. After going back and forth a few times on an item they told them off camera "we will pay you what you want, just say yes to their offer". And Pawn Stars has had actors come in and play sellers.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that shits all scripted too. My parents know someone whose relative was on American Pickers. After going back and forth a few times on an item they told them off camera "we will pay you what you want, just say yes to their offer". And Pawn Stars has had actors come in and play sellers.
You mean TV isn't real! I'm shocked.
ATT Watch TV (Score:2)
ATT Watch TV is free for a single stream of 30+ channels if you have their unlimited mobile data plan. You also get a choice between HBO, some other movie channel (cinemax maybe?) or a streaming service like pandora/spotify. I just went with HBO Go. Just download the Apps on roku or firetv and pay nothing. Between that, OTA, and Hulu, you should be fine for watching most things.
Fuck this overpriced shit because Viacom wont let you have 1 channel without paying for 67 other channels. Fuck Honey BooBoo and h
Canceled Sub (Score:1)
TV is dead except for the dead (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I consider watching videos all day on your computer to be the same thing as TV. The technology details are different, the effect is the same.
Re: (Score:2)
Except you can watch videos all day on your computer for free, instead of $217.42 monthly.
Re: (Score:3)
People who think video games are for kids.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's a solution to those needs: literacy. You can find far more useful, accurate and unbiased information by reading. You can find and evaluate all the different sides of a story through the internet instead of soaking up the opinion a talking head tells you to have.
For weather and traffic, learning how to use your smartphone will make them far more convenient and personalized.
Watching local sports live is a plausible use case, but you can save yourself $200 a month by rooting for a non-local sports team
Break the bundle... (Score:2)
Internet service is needed to watch these things, and if you don't get Cable TV from your broadband provider, the bill eats your savings... you just can't win.
Cable is the cheapest (Score:2)
Besides getting free TV-signal over the air, getting it from your cable-provider is the cheapest, all thing considered.
Or, rather, it has to be the cheapest — and, if it is not, it the provider either being inefficient, or taking advantage of their monopoly power in your area. (Or both.)
High-bandwidth streams, flowing from remote datacenters separately to each viewer — encryption [qz.com] defeating
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ugh (Score:2)
And I was looking at cutting the cord from Comcast (although I'm stuck getting internet from them) That price is almost the same as what I'm paying now for TV.
TV (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The word television combines tele, "far off" in Greek, and vision, "something seen in the imagination," from a Latin root.
Viacom is bullshit (Score:2)
Ha ha, YouTube copies Apple and Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
There was a day when most businesses leased their computers and software and paid regular support contract fees, and then along came Jobs and Woz at Apple and Gates at Microsoft with the sales pitch that said, essentially, "why are you paying all that money and not having ownership or control? Buy OUR stuff instead and you will OWN it, and own your data and control it all and be free of the monthly ransom payments!"
People listened, and bought into the ownership model, and all the big old vendors collapsed with some re-inventing themselves to fit the new model and others now being just a memory.
Once they attained market saturation, Apple and Microsoft needed a way to convince investors of rising revenue with a customer base that was not growing fast enough, and they re-awakened the old business model they destroyed - they re-branded offsite storage under somebody else's control as "the cloud", and leased software as cloud-related "365" this-n-that ---- but it's really just that they have discovered why big lazy no longer creative companies loved the old model of holding users hostage.
In a similar way, consumers have long been tied to cable companies and their bundles. As the prices rose higher and higher and service got worse, YouTube and others stepped-in as newcomers encouraging a new model: streaming video and no bundles - watch what you want when you want for a low price. "Cord cutting" was the new buzzword. Unfortunately, you still had to have the cable company for that fast internet access, so you still had that part of the bill to pay. Now, however, YouTube has clearly decided to embrace the bundle model that the cable companies were so wedded to - so their users will have all the downsides of streaming, plus the cable bill for fast net access, plus the same sort of bundled content and related costs. Just as before, the user will pay for a huge number of channels while only watching one at a time, only now he/she cannot have multiple family members watching multiple shows simultaneously on multiple devices at no extra cost as they used to with cable. Oh, and since it's streaming data rather than broadcast on a cable, there are all the issues of paying for and needing more bandwidth...
Sometimes, the dinosaurs in an industry have a lesson to teach: to be fat, dumb, and happy in that marketplace one probably needs that evil business model. Sometimes, the former upstarts in an industry forget the lessons they themselves once taught, and they leave themselves vulnerable to newer upstarts who remember those lessons....
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have direct experience with 365, but for Apple...
With iCloud, you can get 50GB of high-availability, offsite backup for $12 a year. What "own your own hardware" alternative would you suggest that achieves the same? How much of my time will it take to set up and manage?
They forgot to tell me the important part (Score:2)
The "why should I want to have that in the first place" part.
the rising cost of content (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ouch (Score:2)
I actually do subscribe to one of these services - Philo - but its literally only for one channel (the Travel Channel - what can I say I like their cheesy ghost story shows).
Even then it's a little expensive at $20/month, since I also pay for Netflix, CBS All Access, Prime (though moreso for shipping), CuriosityStream and Disney Plus.
Even all those together though are still only coming in about even with YouTube TV.
Re: (Score:2)
I actually do subscribe to one of these services - Philo - but its literally only for one channel (the Travel Channel - what can I say I like their cheesy ghost story shows).
Even then it's a little expensive at $20/month, since I also pay for Netflix, CBS All Access, Prime (though moreso for shipping), CuriosityStream and Disney Plus.
Even all those together though are still only coming in about even with YouTube TV.
I simply cannot understand why anyone would pay for so many streaming services. Perhaps you have a large family and they all like to watch different things?
Re: (Score:2)
Meh - I have a family of 4, but it's mostly for specific shows.
Netflix is general purpose. CBS All Access is for Star Trek (Picard and Discovery). Disney Plus is for Mandalorian. Prime like I said is mostly for shipping with videos as a side benefit. CuriousityStream has a better selection of documentaries.
Narrative content isn't quite like food where as long as you get some into your system you're sustained - specific stories are usually desired.
I know that is going to hurt but... (Score:2)
do yourself a favor and just get rid of cable tv. The vast majority of it is absolute garbage. Since the pandemic I have noticed that I don't really miss sports. I thought I was going to but in its absence I have discovered that I truly don't give a shit who wins or loses. Long ago I gave up on the nightly news. As near as I can tell it is nothing but propaganda. The only decision to make is if you want Fox flavored or CNN flavored propaganda. Don't even get me started on sitcoms, reality bullshit, home sho
Re: (Score:2)
Well played. I had Disney+ for a while and soon started to suffer from content deficit. Loved The Maldalorian and probably would have kept it but with no kids at home anymore I ran out of reasons to keep it. Prime Video I see as sort of an afterthought. I get Prime for the shipping, music and book benefits mainly. There are a few good shows on there (Bosch comes to mind) and some oddball documentaries. Not as good as Netflix but still some worthwhile stuff if you are willing to fish around a bit.
Love the T-
They inject commercials in the show (Score:2)
What is it with geniuses at the networks anyway? Pre-DVRs they'd take a popular show, put it against another popular show and, if it's rating went down, they'd cancel it. Or they would take a fa
Re: (Score:2)
IMHO, the idiots that run the networks, and those that run YouTube, need to be run out of town on a rail.
So stop giving them money.
Philo's great so far (Score:2)
Yeah, I was thinking WTF? until the end of the summary, "oh yeah, Philo's $20 ... "
but is missing news and sports channels.
That's a feature, not a bug.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I was thinking WTF? until the end of the summary, "oh yeah, Philo's $20 ... "
but is missing news and sports channels.
That's a feature, not a bug.
You know, I wouldn't have noticed either. Useless crap I don't want to pay for.
So cable TV, then? (Score:3)
Thats what, slightly cheaper than the lowest tier cable TV package? One of the reasons my preferred service is a private torrent tracker.
Summary... goodbye YouTube TV (Score:2)
My guess is that YouTube TV had no target market.
People who watch video online either watch web series such as Netflix originals, shorts such as Normal YouTube, news such as BBC, or they watch sports through services like NBA all access. I have not checked, but I imagine ESPN has something too.
People who YouTube TV could target are people who already have cable or are happy with antennas. People like m
I was wondering why they kept advertising it to me (Score:2)
I was using sling for a while, but when they lost MLB I dropped them.
So in other words... (Score:2)
"In a company blog post, YouTube defended its decision by announcing the availability of additional channels from Viacom, including MTV and Nickelodeon. " ...YouTube is doing the same thing that cable networks have done which is to bundle shit that no one wants and charge accordingly. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not all OTA TV would be 'pay only' regardless.
Even if it did go that way, I'd just not bother with TV anymore. I'd just download whatever I wanted to watch. Or just go find something else to do.
If you're so addicted to watching shows that you're going to develop emotional problems because you can't do it anymore then I feel sorry for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
canard
Why would you think I drink a Cardassian beverage? xD
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ATSC 3.0
Does that have a deployment schedule yet, or is it still just talk?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: This comment is for rubbing your noses in it (Score:2)
You're joking right. You go on like _normal_ streaming services Hulu, Netflix, STARZ, Disney, Apple TV+ etc etc etc don't exist. They compete with each other and we can pick whichever or any combination we want. No contract, no first year discount crap, and so we can watch all the want and hop around between them if we really want to save a buck.
Netflix is like $10 a month. What can you get for $10 from the resident cable company for that? For $15-20 Time Warner used to give local channels only, all t
Re: (Score:2)
Also I recommend getting an antenna to people all the time, and paying NOTHING for TV.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My total entertainment expenses are $2 per month (which goes to Hulu -- I'd be paying the exact same internet service bill regardless because I need it for work). That gets me far more content than I could ever watch, but really there's far more content than I could ever watch for free on the likes of Tubi, Twitch, Youtube and so forth. I even get live sports for free legally -- been watching Rakuten Monkeys baseball all season on Twitter while your cable package hasn't had anything to show.
If you'd rather
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You and I have very different ideas of what cord cutting means. If you're looking for a 1 to 1 replacement for Cable or Satellite TV, you're not a cord cutter. You're just exchanging one cord for another (the logic behind that choice has always eluded me).
Cord cutting means that you realize Cable and Satellite TV do not provide adequate value for the money they take and the frustration they inflict, and you don't want them. You then find your entertainment elsewhere, such as streaming and/or other activitie
Re: (Score:2)
That combined with the nasty strategies they use by bundling things with your internet connection, lock-in, deceiving pricing, difficulty to switch.
If YoutubeTV bumps its price, it is much easier to switch to something else, or remove it completely. Again, pay for what you need.
In other words, better, saner, competition instead of cable operators leveraging their monopoly to charge customers for tons of things they don't use.
Re: (Score:2)
Recently I have gotten into the habit of only watching Fox News,
Oh boy! The Trump Propaganda Network!
Re: (Score:2)
Hell, you can go to foxnews.com right now and read through whatever you're interested in far faster than sitting there slowly absorbing it, along with all the ads.