Google Unveils New 'YouTube TV' Streaming Service for $35 per Month

[avanpelt]

My "internet-only" bill (25/5) from Comcast is up to $85 already... So start adding in this $35/month for YouTube service alongside Netflix, iTunes rentals, etc. and suddenly that huge cable sub bill won't start looking so bad after all.

No thanks - I'll pass.

I hope you get fiber in your neighborhood soon. AT&T Fiber and Google Fiber have left the cable companies' heads spinning in Metro Atlanta.

Charter was charging me $120/month for 100/5. AT&T Fiber is 1000/1000 for $70/month. And that's their everyday rate with no other services bundled. It's unreal.

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

1) Home phone?
2) Because I hate Comcast. They constantly mess up my bill, charging me for extra cable boxes that I don't have, etc.
3) I have a $30 / month (comparable in price) cable package from Comcast (only because it was free for a year with internet bundle), but it's missing some key TV channels like ESPN that YouTube TV includes, not to mention the cable box is huge, slow, buggy, and doesn't have any DVR features. For better channels and a better cable box with DVR, I'm sure Comcast would charge $60-$100, which is then priced much higher than YouTube TV and not comparable.
4) From your own math, $50 for internet plus $35 for YouTube TV is a heck of a lot cheaper than the $120 you're paying. Seriously, lose the land line and free yourself from overpriced 3 in 1 bundles.
5) Did I mention Comcast is terrible? Seriously, I would rather give my money to any other company. Comcast is the worst company in America, and AT&T and Verizon aren't far behind.

When my free year of Comcast cable TV is up, I'm dropping to internet only (they are the only option I have) and might pick up some service like YouTube TV.

This I agree with. Cable boxes are horrible. It's the equipment and the software they use. I used to have four boxes, now I only have one cause I couldn't break the package and I'm paying a damn good price for what I'm getting. The box I have is not even hooked up, it's in the closet.

We watch all TV from the TimeWarner(Spectrum) TV app on the Roku box, Samsung smart TV, Xbox One, tablets and smartphones. It's actually much more reliable than the cable boxes.

 

[ThisBougieLife]

My roommate and I are paying for Play Station Vue. Can't really see a reason to switch to YouTube at the moment. But good to know that these "streaming cable" services are coming more popular.

 

[Labeno]

If it cost that much, there better not be any commercials or I'll stick with Netflix with no commercials

 

[Michael Scrip]

The phone and tech companies may as well admit that they can’t re-invent television without the cooperation of the players who created the latter. The status quo has no interest in disrupting their money cow. Meanwhile, it’s ludicrous to think that any of the so-called cord-cutting solutions that re-package cable tv are any different than cable tv. Alternatives, like Netflix, are the only real competition.

Exactly.

Even though Netflix and Amazon are becoming popular... traditional linear TV is still worth billion of dollars.

People are still getting A LOT of their TV from scheduled ad-supported programming.

It's gonna be a long time before the "Monday at 8pm" show ends up on some app or streaming service.

 

[newyorkone]

This is about the same price as my current channels package with FIOS, and I get way more channels. I'm always going to need HS internet so bundles will always be hard to beat from the cable companies. Besides, no thanks to more ad tracking...

 

[bayportbob]

DirecTV Now seems like a better value—at least for those of us who signed up at the lower $35 for 100 channels price. This does have CBS, but the main reason I want CBS is for NFL, and with no NFL it doesn't make sense for me to get it. There's also no Food Network, which is the deal breaker for my wife.

the food network is on DirecTN Now. shell out the money for your wife to get it.

 

[akuma13]

Why is every one praising DTV Now when it does not have a viable DVR yet? I would rather have DVR than 100 channels.

 

[gijoeinla]

I'll stick to DirecTV Now. Supports all my Apple TV's and iOS devices, and has more channels for only $10 more.

That and I'm not giving Google one cent of my money.

Or MY PERSONAL VIEWING DATA...

Love how some of you are willing to PAY Google to MINE and PROFIT off all your viewing info...and sell it to the highest bidder.

 

[Paul Dawkins]

Where are you Apple?

At the drawing board actually thinking.

 

[skinned66]

I'm going to cut cable to get cable over the internet. Oh wait, I can't because of deals these channels cut with cable providers in my region.

Same ol' same ol'.

 

[avanpelt]

Why is every one praising DTV Now when it does not have a viable DVR yet? I would rather have DVR than 100 channels.

It's $35/month for 100+ channels for those of us that got the promo deal. That's why. I couldn't care less that it doesn't have DVR yet. It has no garbage channels like home shopping networks and 24/7 infomercial channels that sell weight loss crap by day and sex toys at night. The traditional DIRECTV service seemed to be getting more and more cluttered with that crap.

With DIRECTV Now, I actually get more channels I want to watch that weren't even included in the package I was paying $105/month for with traditional DIRECTV. That price was for two HD TVs and no premium channels.

The box that I will ship the leased receivers back to DIRECTV in arrived today. I'll save $65/month (because my DTV Now bill is actually $40/month since I added HBO) and I'll now be able to watch TV even in a torrential downpour -- something I never could do with traditional DTV.

 

[unlinked]

Thanks, I asked my credit card if it would like to join but the card didn't wanted. I assume US only as usual due to content rights ... next ....

Given Youtube Red is their own content and it is only available in like 5 countries I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for this to expand.

 

[Kabeyun]

I'd rather have SONY not know what to do with my viewing habits data than have Google know.

Damn skippy. The vendable-me-profile has far more blank spaces than most, and I intend to do what I can to keep it that way.

 

[Appleaker]

This really should include YouTube Red in my opinion, not only does it add value to this deal but it also makes sense because of YouTube Red shows.

 

[coolbreeze]

Ha, I have the same DTVNow grandfathered at $35 & SiriusXM lifetime several years ago.

I don't know what GPMAA is.

GPMAA = Google Play Music All Access

Includes ad-free Youtube and unlimited music streaming/downloading. It's fantastic.

 

[dwaltwhit]

I'll give it a shot if theres a free trial. I am skeptical but open to anything

 

[nfl46]

No, thanks. I'd rather use PSVue.

 

[Stevez67]

I didn't "cut the cable" so I could sign up for the very same "package of garbage channels" delivered through the internet. Either give me the option to choose individual channels a la carte, or I'm not even remotely interested.

 

[masterhiggins]

Where are you Apple?

They're too busy with transgender bathroom lobbying.

 

[AT&T representative]

$35 seems a bit steep for channels that you can get for free over the air.

 

[Michael Scrip]

$35 seems a bit steep for channels that you can get for free over the air.

"...and approximately 30 major cable channels..."

 

[Tech198]

I didn't "cut the cable" so I could sign up for the very same "package of garbage channels" delivered through the internet. Either give me the option to choose individual channels a la carte, or I'm not even remotely interested.

You mean like the ones u can get now on Apple TV ? u can download "limited" (yes) but still seperate apps from the App Store,, Hulu, Netflix.. on tvOS

Its probably more to do with "well... Apple doesn't pay a hefty $30 bucks flat fee, so networks arn't interested." Which would be why they go for Youtube..

Even HBO offers an app separately for only $15 but their a cable provider so they'd make it up anyway elsewhere

 

[joy.757]

Wow. Good, though it does seem somewhat expensive for 40 channels.

 

[wigby]

And yet another area where Apple said they nailed it. The reality however... everyone is delivering and overhauling Apple. But but... I hear some people say... Apple makes the most profits from them all. My question to those is: how do you benefit as a customer from that (why does it make you proud)? And my second question: how long can those exorbitant high (shameful high) profits sustain if they keep delivering next to nothing at this pace?

Apple never said they "nailed it". It's a rumor spread by Apple fans eager to pay Apple for such a service that began with the Steve Jobs biography. Apple is watching this space to see how Google fails and succeeds. I wish they would move faster but their patience insures that they'll get it right. And this also ties into their profits and success.

I was an Apple shareholder so I benefited from their success but I wouldn't say I was proud. I would say that their success is very important to the longevity of any product. Look at Google or Microsoft jumping into markets too early and failing. All of those customers are left with aging devices that are no longer supported or devices that developers ignore because of limited success. Apple would abandon failed products too but they have such a lower failure rate that it pays to be an Apple customer even if the initial buy in is more expensive.