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

YouTube TV sharply increases monthly subscription to $64.99

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 466 posts

Re: YouTube TV sharply increases monthly subscription to $64.99

#291

Post by toast0 »

bonestamp2 wrote: post #246
nerfhammer wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

always wondered if netflix couldn't have had warehouses full of dvd drives to avoid licensing fees. wouldn't work for new releases with a lot of peak demand but maybe it would be more feasible for the back catalog of older titles.

When you buy a consumer DVD, that DVD only has a license for home viewing. Video stores require a special license to rent out videos. So, I assume netflix would have to pay that fee at least (which they probably already had for their mail order DVDs).

> Video stores require a special license to rent out videos.

First sale doctrine covers rentals, but having good relations with studios to get supply of new releases often influences rental establishments to avoid buying discs at retail to rent out. (But, RedBox will sometimes do it)

Re: YouTube TV sharply increases monthly subscription to $64.99

#292

Post by leetrout »

juped wrote: post #183
chrsstrm wrote: post #45

For any YouTube TV PMs reading, I just added an event to my calendar marking the day I'll cancel my account. Thanks for the helpful reference to the exact date my current rate expires. Spectrum is offering more channels for $45/month and you don't even need a cable box if you're using an Apple TV. YouTube TV is an OK service that is very rough around the edges and I won't miss it a single minute after I cancel. "This…

I assume they want cancellations so they can shutter it with less friction.

That’s an interesting thought!

Re: YouTube TV sharply increases monthly subscription to $64.99

#294

Post by leetrout »

easytiger wrote: post #293

We don't have this in Europe. Does it carry in show adverts as well?

Yes.

You get the same ads as when the show is airing live and if it’s a local market slot you get a dark screen with text saying it’s taking a commercial break.

When watching shows you recorded as a DVR you can skip them by fast forwarding.

When watching shows YouTube tv has offered that you didn’t record you get preroll and in-line ads that are usually unskippable just like Hulu.

Re: YouTube TV sharply increases monthly subscription to $64.99

#295

Post by m0xte »

adamweld wrote: post #230
Ed314159 wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The non-commercial band in the United States is 88-92FM. All the best (many college) stations will be in this band: KFJC, WFMU, KEXP... Radio is alive and well in the U.S., its just not commercial radio.

KEXP is amazing. Highly recommend people check them out (online at kexp.org if you're not in seattle).

They have some good stuff on YouTube as well.

Re: YouTube TV sharply increases monthly subscription to $64.99

#296

Post by easytiger »

leetrout wrote: post #294
easytiger wrote: post #293

We don't have this in Europe. Does it carry in show adverts as well?

Yes. You get the same ads as when the show is airing live and if it’s a local market slot you get a dark screen with text saying it’s taking a commercial break. When watching shows you recorded as a DVR you can skip them by fast forwarding. When watching shows YouTube tv has offered that you didn’t record you get preroll and in-line ads that are usually unskippable just like Hulu.

Thanks. That's horrific.

Re: YouTube TV sharply increases monthly subscription to $64.99

#297

Post by exikyut »

Hamuko wrote: post #261
exikyut wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, what did that look like?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Zh5EqlqvHE

Wow, that's pretty much exactly the kind of introspective I guess I was looking for. Thanks.

Kind of sad it got killed off :(

Re: YouTube TV sharply increases monthly subscription to $64.99

#298

Post by ilaksh »

jimbob45 wrote: post #64

The whole streaming platform war is beginning to resemble the Stone Soup parable. At some point, no platform will have enough content for anyone to care to subscribe (arguably now). Someone needs to come along and convince them all that sharing is in everyone’s best interests. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_Soup

That reminded me of Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup ("dcss"), which is a pretty great free-to-play game.

https://crawl.develz.org/

Re: YouTube TV sharply increases monthly subscription to $64.99

#299

Post by aggie »

drgath wrote: post #258
judge2020 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like you have a generation 1 Chromecast™ and bad WiFi. We hope you'll try YouTube TV again with a Chromecast Ultra™ and a Nest Wifi™ 3 pack. Take care!

Asking someone to spend $400+ just to upgrade equipment in order to support a service that doesn’t work well on the original equipment you sold them, takes some guts.

It's sarcasm

Re: YouTube TV sharply increases monthly subscription to $64.99

#300

Post by paulie_a »

ls612 wrote: post #55
crazygringo wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no lawyer, but it doesn't exactly seem legal. Streaming free local network broadcasts was definitively ruled as illegal by the Supreme Court in 2014 -- remember that was Aereo's entire business model. [1] It seems like the Stanford service is trying to justify themselves by being an academic study and limiting to 500 concurrent participants... but it's telling they don't list any legal justification on the site,…

I never understood what the business interest of the tv stations was in preventing streaming online. They already give away for free the stream over the air. What gives? Do they make money on the antennas or receivers or something?

> I never understood what the business interest of the tv stations was in preventing streaming online. They already give away for free the stream over the air. What gives? Do they make money on the antennas or receivers or something?

Pretty simple. They money using a tried and true model, why would they bother innovating or rocking the boat. It's much easier to collect the check for most of the money on the table than to bother innovating and collecting a slightly higher percentage with signicant potential downsides.

Post reply on HN