YouTube TV Raises Prices From $50/Month to $65/Month

[turbineseaplane]

This makes me wonder if it's the start of Google getting out of this business altogether, as they've done with so many other products over the years.

I won't be surprised if they punt in the next 24 months (right around the 5 year mark on this "experiment")

 

[rgeneral]

I'm going to assume I can't do that on my LG TV and I rather not have to stream to my TV. Doesn't bother me too much but I have noticed the ads continue to increase with longer mandatory watch times before being able to skip them.

Right. that will be more difficult. you would have to try to block it at the router

 

[kwandrews]

Yikes. I tried TYV after leaving ATT TVnow because of their price hike. I paused my TYV membership 3 months ago and haven't missed it. I just cancelled it totally. I now get by with an indoor OTA antenna + booster (works great, even 60 miles from towers), Netflix, AppleTV Plus (still in my 1 year trial and like it) and Amazon Prime. I've got all I need so far....good riddance.

 

[Jarrett Arnette]

i'm starting to forget why i cancelled cable in the first place.

The primary reason I left cable/satellite isn’t the monthly fee, it’s the flexibility of a monthly subscription and not having to deal with their equipment etc.
If any steaming provider gets to be too expensive, I can just leave them and either go with someone else or go without. The advantage is being able to make those choices, no muss, no fuss, and no 2+ year commitment.

 

[ryanmcv]

RIP, YouTube TV.

 

[turbineseaplane]

What are the providers going to do when Gen Z becomes the market demographic. They care the least about live programming and will find something they like on demand. Not going to get $100 month for video from this group.

I really believe their current "plan" is to just ride this horse 'till she won't buck anymore..

 

[richpjr]

I haven't tested YouTubeTV's limits but they make it sound like each user gets 3 concurrent streams. "6 accounts per household, each with its own unique recommendations, and 3 concurrent streams."

It's 3 total streams per account, not per user.

 

[waquzy]

always blows my mind how much you guys have to pay for TV in the US. I pay 50 Euro for internet and the complete SKY HD package combined

Don’t forget that you also pay for the TV License

 

[rpe33]

At this price point, what’s the appeal of this service over cable?

If you only need one or two TV's hooked up then it really doesn't make sense to go with a service like YTTV. I however need 5 TV's hooked up and every cable/sat company charges extra for every cable box, so what would normally be a $60-$70 service turns into well over $100, so for me it's still cheaper to have an OTT service. I may switch to Fubo though, not sure yet.

 

[tbayrgs]

The primary reason I left cable/satellite isn’t the monthly fee, it’s the flexibility of a monthly subscription and not having to deal with their equipment etc.
If any steaming provider gets to be too expensive, I can just leave them and either go with someone else or go without. The advantage is being able to make those choices, no muss, no fuss, and no 2+ year commitment.

Same. Additionally, I have immediate access to the same programming on my phone, iPad, or computer. I was an early adopter of Sony's Playstation Vue (still the best overall value, IMO. RIP.) and jumped over to YouTube TV early when it was less than $40/mo. When they kept raising their rates AND were losing all of their regional sports programming, I left for Hulu TV. Normally, for $62, I have live TV, traditional Hulu access, Disney+, and ESPN+. Since there are no sports, it was easy to step down to the Hulu/Disney+/ESPN+ bundle for only $13/mo. When sports once again resume, a quick change to my account on their website brings back live TV. It was NEVER remotely close to being that convenient to do the same sorts of changes, if possible at all thanks to yearly contracts, with traditional cable or satellite. Same goes for cancelling service outright.

To be honest, if it wasn't for watching live sports, we'd have ditched the traditional cable/streaming services long ago. Unfortunately, my family are huge sports fans--NBA, NFL, Premier League and especially NHL--and there are few stand-alone options outside of cable or these streaming services to watch sports.

 

[PatriotInvasion]

So perhaps the price of cable was always the right price all along. All Comcast or Verizon FiOS need to do now is ditch the antiquated set top box rental fees and you essentially get more for your money on the same bill as your internet. Price point had been the main differentiator but not anymore.

 

[lJoSquaredl]

165 DOLLARS PER MONTH? i dont think anyone would pay that here. insanity

My relative pays $190 a month, and they only watch Discovery, Nat Geo, those House Hunters/house refurb/whatever type shows and Fox News/Fox Business. Not sure all that is worth what they pay.

 

[magicschoolbus]

i'm starting to forget why i cancelled cable in the first place.

This will continue. As TV distribution continues to separate, and content goes to content specific platforms, Cable TV will look like a good deal again.

Add up all of those streaming services and see what everyone is paying.. garuntee between Netflix, Amazon prime, and Internet, YouTube TV.. it would be cheaper to just have bundled cable and internet..

 

[S.B.G]

Raising the price again to watch more and more commercials. Pass.

Glad I cancelled TV (streaming and traditional) years ago.

 

[grobik]

Yowsers. I got really tired of streaming service bouncing. Currently have spectrum online for $25. Which lets you pick 20 channels to build out your customer service. Gives me locals, news and the 3-4 other networks I care about. And leaves me extra cash to spend on hbo and a few other $3-$8 per month services.

 

[turbineseaplane]

The linear TV industry has a real reckoning coming.

Their core "don't care what it costs, I'll keep paying" base of customers is aging out quickly.

Meanwhile, the direct to consumer streaming sports video app offerings keep getting better and more fleshed out.
At some point the sword will swing on that.

 

[cane811]

At this price point, what’s the appeal of this service over cable?

You can have multiple logins to split the cost.

 

[i-John]

always blows my mind how much you guys have to pay for TV in the US. I pay 50 Euro for internet and the complete SKY HD package combined

I know the SKY packages, and you get pretty much nothing in the £50 range (which is $60 in the US btw) worth watching.
[automerge]1593559808[/automerge]

it’s baffling to me how one of the richest companies in the world can justify a rate increase right now...for channels nobody was asking for. It’s absurd.

Why do they have to justify it? You want what they have, pay up or go elsewhere.

 

[ipedro]

And people complain that tv is too expensive @ $4.99. lol

I still remember paying over $100/month for cable. When the very first tv arrived in 2007, I cancelled cable and started buying movies and TV shows, complemented by video podcasts. What we have today is a flippin' dream for us early cord cutters. Netflix, Disney+, tv+ and Crave (with HBO) are all like $30 and I have more TV than I could ever watch.

 

[jtmarine73]

They're going down the same exact road as the cable companies. Add more channels, hike prices. Add more channels, hike prices, rinse, repeat.

I'm canceling my subscription. I canceled cable because I was paying a fortune for channels I never watch, and now YouTube TV wants me to pay a fortune for channels I'll never watch.

Buh, bye!

I cancelled when they bumped it to $50. It's the best streaming service, but FFS... at $65 I can get Uverse and my internet combined.

 

[DrGorilla]

Nobody in the US would settle for an European paycheck either. Median household income in the US is nearly 2x that of the EU. Things necessarily cost more.

You do realise you’ve compared a countries income to a continent, some of which have lower standards of living. It would be like comparing EU to America inc Mexico, Brazil etc. The other thing is, most countries in EU also have things like free health care (at point of contact), cheaper utilities and food so don’t need the higher salaries.

 

[windowsblowsass]

Won't be long until the others follow suit.

Exactly. These haven’t been labeled introductory offers but they aren’t at profitable price points and will continue to increase.

 

[pers0n]

Hoping Pi-hole can block youtube ads on ipad/iPhone in the near future

 

[konqerror]

You do realise you’ve compared a countries income to a continent, some of which have lower standards of living. It would be like comparing EU to America inc Mexico, Brazil etc.

No. The EU is a single economic bloc with a common market and largely shares a single currency. It is more than a "continent". One of the goals of the common market is to equalize costs; if it's cheaper to build something in country A versus B, you can do it without incurring additional tariffs, regulatory barriers, etc. Likewise, free movement of people means people can move freely between countries in pursuit of a bigger paycheck.

You can compare the EU to US and Canada which share a pseudo-common market, and you still get the same conclusion (Canada is about $8k per year behind the US)

The other thing is, most countries in EU also have things like free health care (at point of contact), cheaper utilities and food so don’t need the higher salaries.

The comparison holds on a real and PPP-adjusted basis, so factors like utilities and food and healthcare have been compensated. I've also pointed out before, Americans don't pay for the majority (70-80%) of our healthcare either, our employers do.

 

[windowsblowsass]

^^This...being a streaming service, they should offer lesser packs like choose 15 channels of your choice for $20/mo or something. I watch about 10 different channels at most.

Content providers won’t play ball. Never have and they’ve got all the leverage