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

YouTube TV raises subscription to $72.99, inching closer to cable pricing

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 161 posts

Re: YouTube TV raises subscription to $72.99, inching closer to cable pricing

#11

Post by ericmay »

Krastan wrote: post #4
costanzaDynasty wrote: post #3

Because its alway been cable. Just Youtube, Sony, Fubo etc are the cable provider. Yes it streams, but it was never the same as a streaming service. Something like PlutoTv or the soon to be oversaturated FAST market is just rabbit ears. Mono culture is coming back big in the next couple of years, and this is how. When our streaming forefathers spoke of a la carte as the future, they should have specified each individ…

The issue is is that all the big networks still own all the rights. Initially they sold them for cheap to vMVPDs but now the networks are charging more so YouTube fubo etc have to pay more leading to these price increases.

But as prices go up customers cancel, and so then there is pressure to decrease prices.

The networks can’t achieve economies of scale with independent apps so they have to cave to price pressure too.

Re: YouTube TV raises subscription to $72.99, inching closer to cable pricing

#12

Post by dw_arthur »

costanzaDynasty wrote: post #3

Because its alway been cable. Just Youtube, Sony, Fubo etc are the cable provider. Yes it streams, but it was never the same as a streaming service. Something like PlutoTv or the soon to be oversaturated FAST market is just rabbit ears. Mono culture is coming back big in the next couple of years, and this is how. When our streaming forefathers spoke of a la carte as the future, they should have specified each individ…

Monoculture won't be coming back since a part of it was everyone watching or listening to something at the same time. If you missed the finale of Seinfeld or Cheers you'd have to wait a long time to see it again. No one is keeping their calendar open to watch any sort of media these days.

Re: YouTube TV raises subscription to $72.99, inching closer to cable pricing

#13

Post by Someone1234 »

I dislike price rises, and related I dislike paying for expensive sports licensing I don't watch. Sports fans should pay for sports instead of everyone subsidizing it.

That being said, as someone who helped family move off of cable in the last year, this is only inching closer to cable's headline pricing which is largely a fiction. All the big four providers of cable/satellite have the following pricing:

- Advertised discount price (12-24 month contract)

- Normal price

- Taxes & Fees

Sometimes you can keep threatening to cancel, take out a new 12-24 month contract, and keep the "discounted" price. But in my experience each discount is less and less generous relative to what they're advertising.

Then there are taxes & fees. The taxes are, well, taxes and also apply to streaming TV. But a lot of the "fees" have nothing at all to do with government. They're just unavoidable parts of the service's price that the cable/satellite vendors split off to misrepresent the costs.

These include, but not limited to:

- Equipment fee (main box cannot be avoided, additional boxes can be)

- Broadcast TV Fee + Regional Sports Fee (unavoidable)

- HD TV Fee (often if your equipment SUPPORTS HD then you are required to pay it)

- Administrative/Convenience Fees (rarely this can be reduced by jumping through hoops e.g. pay by paper check)

These can easily add $20 to your bill. If your contract doesn't allow monthly increases, that can sometimes not apply to fees (either increases to existing or new ones).

Re: YouTube TV raises subscription to $72.99, inching closer to cable pricing

#14

Post by apocalyptic0n3 »

bombcar wrote: post #10
LegitShady wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube tv is not the same as YouTube premium.

This is incredibly stupid naming. I saw these prices and just entirely gave up even thinking about premium until I saw the note (and then I still gave up on it, anyway).

No one has ever accused Google of being good with naming things, that's for sure.

Re: YouTube TV raises subscription to $72.99, inching closer to cable pricing

#15

Post by somethoughts »

adrianmonk wrote: post #8
andrewstuart wrote: post #5

Errrr, what? I'm sick of ads on YouTube so I was thinking of subscribing. But it's USD$73 A MONTH? That's like more than AUD$100 a month. What am I missing? That's about 4 X ridiculous.

> What am I missing? You're missing "TV". YouTube and YouTube TV are different products. Yes, the brands are pretty confusing.

I think the smart thing to have done would have been to bundle Youtube TV subscriptions with Youtube Premium access - or at least have a Youtube One subscription plan for $79.99 or something.

Otherwise as a potential new customer, Youtube TV seems to be one of just many offerings with no real advantage.

Re: YouTube TV raises subscription to $72.99, inching closer to cable pricing

#17

Post by commiepatrol »

adubashi wrote: post #2

As much as I hate to admit it, I'll probably still pay it because it's just so much superior to other cable offerings(recording, multiple devices). And there's no other way to watch live sports.

*legally. There are plenty of ways to watch live HD sports.

Re: YouTube TV raises subscription to $72.99, inching closer to cable pricing

#18

Post by owlninja »

Someone1234 wrote: post #13

I dislike price rises, and related I dislike paying for expensive sports licensing I don't watch. Sports fans should pay for sports instead of everyone subsidizing it. That being said, as someone who helped family move off of cable in the last year, this is only inching closer to cable's headline pricing which is largely a fiction. All the big four providers of cable/satellite have the following pricing: - Advertised…

All my regional sports got moved to Bally's and my subscription price to Hulu did not change :(

Re: YouTube TV raises subscription to $72.99, inching closer to cable pricing

#20

Post by elsonrodriguez »

bombcar wrote: post #10
LegitShady wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube tv is not the same as YouTube premium.

This is incredibly stupid naming. I saw these prices and just entirely gave up even thinking about premium until I saw the note (and then I still gave up on it, anyway).

Youtube Premium used to be called Youtube Red.

"It's a good change..."

Post reply on HN