Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 225 posts

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#211

Post by colinmhayes »

systematical wrote: post #60
paxys wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious what the remaining value of YouTube TV even is then. With most sports cut out is it really worth $50/mo?

No, I only used it during football season and now I'm out Monday Night Football. They had already made it harder to set my location to my teams local market (still possible with vpn + location guard but not on TV without chromecasting). With the season nearly over and the Giants season completely over I will probably just cancel early.

All football other than monday is on over the air, all you need is an antenna or twitch.tv on thursdays.

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#212

Post by enos_feedler »

dreyfan wrote: post #108
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube TV is a separate $65/month subscription. Seems like an absurdly high price relative to Hulu or Netflix, but it’s meant to compete more with local cable packages. Without the premium content, it’s hard to do that. I think the content providers know this and are trying to squeeze YouTube into giving more of their profits to the content providers. Either that, or to raise prices to be similar to cable. YouTube T…

Hulu + LiveTV is $65 and Sling is about $50 and Youtube TV $65. These aren’t really comparable to standard Hulu or Netflix or Amazon Prime etc. It’s for people that want to pretend they’re cord-cutting while buying the exact same thing from a streaming company.

there are some differences so the prices can't be taken at face value. For example, Sling stopped providing NBC regional sports networks I use to watch the San Jose Sharks. I had to switch to Youtube TV. These regional channels are super value as there is no way to get them through other direct streaming services. ESPN+ will do regional blackouts for example if you are local region is broadcasting the games.

I will also say Youtube TV is not the "Exact same thing" that the cable company offers. Fundamentally the product/channels are, but youtube TV gets all the tech right.

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#213

Post by enos_feedler »

xxpor wrote: post #191
saltminer wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s for people that want to pretend they’re cord-cutting while buying the exact same thing from a streaming company. It legitimately is way better than cable, though. Ignoring the disputes over fees, I once tried Spectrum's TV Android app (probably 3-4 years ago, I gave up on getting it to work), and this is what I experienced: * Refuses to work if a VPN is on * Must disable developer tools (doesn't matter if you…

On the other hand, 65 bucks a month is more expensive than my local Comcast package with the premium sports channels (which yttv doesn't even have the option for), plus Comcast has 4k live channels and surround sound. I think their feeds are also less compressed.

What premium sports channels are you missing?

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#214

Post by colinmhayes »

supertrope wrote: post #163
cptskippy wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they, like Sling before and T-Mobile after them, have claimed to disrupt Cable TV while basically just offering Cable TV. The only difference is that you're now responsible for maintaining your own streaming equipment.

A one time $50 purchase of a device is a much better deal than paying $10-$20 monthly rent per box from 2009 that also uses $50 in electricity per year because the power button only cuts video output.

YoutubeTV is $65 a month

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#215

Post by colinmhayes »

jayknight wrote: post #87
awb wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Disney is hoping it’ll drive people to sign up for Disney+ which cuts out the middleman at the cost of not being able to channel surf but instead opening an app.

Disney+ doesn't have live sports.

Disney owns Hulu, which does have Live sports

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#216

Post by _flux »

User23 wrote: post #90
syki wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this time it is much better. I can sign up for a service for a month and binge some shows. Then cancel the service and repeat for another offering. By rotating the services I subscribe to each month I’m effectively watching the content on all the services for a low monthly rate. Eventually these companies will charge an annual rate but right now it’s much better financially and otherwise than cable tv.

Cable TV was a screaming deal, so long as you could always stay on the promotional rate. I haven't had it in a while, but I used to call and "cancel" my service every 3 months to get 3 months of free premium channels and a reduced basic rate. It was pretty funny when I moved and had to actually cancel my service because obviously it was on my file and the support person was like sure no problem here you go and I had…

Ah, a modern version of the fable "The Boy Why Cried Wolf".

Though I suppose with a happier ending.

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#217

Post by timmg »

ryguytilidie wrote: post #184

I absolutely cannot stand the way these TV providers continually try to rope their customers into their disputes. This happened when I had directv, it happened when I had comcast, it happens now with YoutubeTV. I would never in a million years, as a business owner, message one of my clients and blame a vendor for bad service and want them to help solve the dispute. I just do not get the thought process here. "Well, t…

> I would never in a million years, as a business owner, message one of my clients and blame a vendor for bad service and want them to help solve the dispute.

If you were re-selling a vendor's product and the vender raised their prices (to you) by, say, 50%: you'd be silly not to explain to your customers what happened.

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#218

Post by alborzb »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #177
taurath wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US American football only recently became available on streaming - it is currently $450 or $500 per season. You can go to a bar every week and have several drinks and a meal for that money. It’s a little crazy.

Where is this streaming option available for $500? I do not see it on nfl.com If it is subject to blackouts, it does not count. https://www.nfl.com/ways-to-watch/

I'm not OP, but the NFL's streaming service is called 'NFL Sunday Ticket' ( https://nflst.directv.com/ ) and costs $99 per month.

For that price, you get all the NFL games except Monday night and Thursday night games...

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#219

Post by nkozyra »

ghaff wrote: post #201
nkozyra wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The service itself and the way they handled existing accounts through other services. The plug was pulled rather abruptly

I guess I had already dropped cable well before I resubscribed through HBO Max.

Not just cable, other streaming options including through Prime.

Re: YouTube TV loses ESPN, ABC and other Disney channels in fee dispute

#220

Post by gentleman11 »

heartbreak wrote: post #26

I’m really surprised by the number of top level comments that are confusing two different products: YouTube and YouTube TV. YouTube TV is basically cable TV delivered via the internet with some on-demand content and an “unlimited” DVR system. There are multiple tiers via add-on packages (just like cable), and there is no ad-free offering. YouTube is the video sharing website everyone uses. The ad-free version of whic…

Why are you surprised that two identically named services they both stream video content are not known to be different by consumers?
Post reply on HN