| |
| ▲ | GuB-42 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Why would they? The entire point of YouTube Premium is removing ads. There are a few other benefits, but being ad-free is the big one. If they put back ads, I believe that most people will simply cancel their subscription and get a renewed interest in ad-blockers. It makes more sense to just increase the price, as they do. It is not like Amazon. Most people get Amazon Prime for the "free" shipping, and Prime with ads is a good value proposition, you get shipping but get a discount on the part that doesn't interest you. I don't get why tying a shipping to a streaming service isn't more controversial by the way, it is borderline illegal. Oh, and by the way, ad-free is not really ad-free, you still have sponsored segments, but these are not under YouTube control. | | |
| ▲ | lokar 17 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Price discrimination. They currently divide users into two groups: people not willing to pay anything to remove any ads, and people willing to pay the current price to remove all the ads. As the number of users and the price go up, it may make sense to add a middle group: people who are willing to pay some smaller amount to remove (or otherwise reduce the impact) some of the ads. | |
| ▲ | nicce 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Why would they? The entire point of YouTube Premium is removing ads The entire point is to find more ways to make money. They will try new ways as longs as there is too big drop in the users. | |
| ▲ | jjulius 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >Why would they? The entire point of YouTube Premium is removing ads. You could've easily made this argument about Hulu right before it did the exact same thing being described here. >If they put back ads, I believe that most people will simply cancel their subscription and get a renewed interest in ad-blockers. Doing this successfully on your smart TV is a barrier that most non-techy folk aren't going to climb over. In the case of Hulu, most people just... accepted it. Same with the Amazon Prime ads you mentioned. | | | |
| ▲ | tombert 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | At least the sponsored segments can almost automatically be skipped now. If you press forward on the remote it will jump ahead of the sponsored bit. A little annoying that I have to actively skip it but still better than watching them. Dunno, big corporations really like showing ads for some reason. I think Google, whose main business is ads, will try to shove them in more peoples' faces, and claim that YouTube Premium will be "reduced ads" and then there will be YouTube Premium+ that has no ads, for a nominal fee, of course. |
| |
| ▲ | meetingthrower 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This has happened to me btw. I can only suspect they are "testing" the reception. | | |
| ▲ | tombert 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Ugh. I can't speak for anyone else, but I have a very strong, borderline-irrational distaste for ads. I hate advertising, I hate having to watch advertisements, I will go out of my way considerably to avoid ads. I have over 400 blu-rays specifically because I wanted to guarantee that I don't have to risk seeing ads in my media. I liked YouTube Premium because it was an ethical way to avoid ads on YouTube; there's always been adblock but I always felt bad depriving creators of their revenue; most of them (at least at the time) weren't big heartless corporations, they were individuals creating stuff. If I start seeing ads unless I'm extorted for more money, that might end up being a final straw for me. | | |
| ▲ | bigyabai 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I gave up ~2021. Bought one of the 10tb 5200rpm disks and just started yt-dlping entire channels when I found something good. With mixed 360p/480p/720p backups, I've used ~1/5th of the disc across nearly 50,000 files. This does make me the unethical bad-guy, but my aversion to advertisement is so strong that I can't feel any remorse. AdSense is a scourge on the internet, and once Google is held accountable for it they'll immediately try to extort their licensed library of millions of videos to make a living. And they'll have to try a lot harder than that if they want to deprive me of a daily Tom Scott video with my morning coffee. | | |
| ▲ | doublerabbit 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Not really. Youtube is just pocket money for Google. It's not like they're ethical themselves. | | |
| ▲ | bigyabai 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Right now it's pocket money, but the content could very easily (and legally) be turned into a different business model if Google's de-facto ad monopoly falls through. |
|
| |
| ▲ | imiric 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > I liked YouTube Premium because it was an ethical way to avoid ads on YouTube Why would you behave ethically towards a company that is anything but? The slight remorse I feel by not using official YT frontends is towards creators I enjoy watching, who I try to support via other means, if possible. But then again, any creator or business who chooses advertising as their only business model doesn't deserve my support. Advertising is a scourge on humanity. It corrupts every medium of information by allowing sleazy middlemen to psychologically manipulate one party not just into buying products out of manufactured desire, but into thinking and behaving in ways that serve someone's agenda. It is weaponized via platforms built by adtech companies, which have played a major role in the current sociopolitical instability in the world. It is so insidious that even though it has concentrated incredible amounts of wealth into the hands of a few, most people see it as harmless because they get products and services for "free". To hell with all of that. | | |
| ▲ | Fnoord an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | What I was doing, was use YouTube Premium registered via a VPN. I was paying equivalent to 2 EUR in Indian Rupees. And I did not feel bad about it because the main users were my kids on our TV. Now my kid uses SmartTube on TV, and YouTube ReVanced on a smartphone (with NewPipe as backup, sometimes or the other is broken). So they lost money. I do believe the better solution is to go to DIY channel, but yeah. I got Amazon Prime, which gives me free shipping on Amazon. Add on top of that, I can freely support one Twitch stream. So I am going with Critical Role. They also sell their own platform, but it is more expensive than Bezos' deal. It is hard to compete with big tech... I got a hunch feeling my IPv4 is shitlisted here and there though, but it could also be Linux + Firefox + plethora of extensions. I'll get a new IPv4 soon, so a good time to also clear all my cookies and part with some extensions. | |
| ▲ | tombert an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > The slight remorse I feel by not using official YT frontends is towards creators I enjoy watching That's what I felt bad about. I didn't care if I was depriving Google of money, but I was watching a lot of videos of relatively small channels, and I was watching them with ad block, and I wasn't compensating them otherwise. In a bit of fairness (though not much) I was not making much money at the time. I agree that advertising is bad for humanity. I hate ads. I don't like the idea that a corporation is weaponizing my psychology to sell me crap I don't need. For the most part I would rather pay for things, but of course I make a lot more money now than I did back in 2015. I've said it before, but I think it bears repeating: people will pay for things if those things don't suck. I think it speaks to the shittiness of the platforms that people will only use stuff like Facebook and YouTube if they're "free". |
| |
| ▲ | lotsofpulp 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >If I start seeing ads unless I'm extorted for more money, that might end up being a final straw for me. How is it any different than the price increases that have happened up until now? Or do you mean $27 per month for up to 6 accounts is the most you will ever be willing to pay? | | |
| ▲ | tombert 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'm not a huge fan of the current price increase, but what I was referring to was what Amazon Prime did about a year ago. Amazon Prime has ads by default now, or you can get rid of the ads if you pay an additional $3 a month. If they start showing some amount of ads on my YouTube Premium, and start charging a fee to get rid of all of them, I think it will just piss me off; I already pay for YouTube Premium, I am not going to pay extra for extra ad free. | | |
| ▲ | lotsofpulp 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think it is best not to get emotional over a business' marketing decisions. It is simply a change in price, dressed up to be more palatable for people who are not as discerning. Before, Amazon Prime Video without ads was the price of Amazon Prime. Then it became the price of Amazon Prime plus $3 per month. Now it's the price of Amazon Prime plus $5 per month or $46 per year. Same thing with Youtube, or any other product/service, price changes happen all the time. Pay if it is worth it, or don't if it's no longer worth it. | | |
| ▲ | tombert 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I guess I'm just saying I'm not sure I'm going to put up with another price hike. I've grown kind of tired of YouTube as of late anyway, and it's not like I get a lot out of it in any kind of deep meaningful sense. I probably could fairly easily justify canceling it and surviving on my blu-rays. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | iwontberude 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yeah I have literally spent tens of thousands to host media that I could technically have access to for a handful of $10/month subscriptions, but I can't stand ads and cross promotion. A nice bonus is that a movie or TV show can't just randomly leave licensing window and disappear from my catalog. |
|
|
|
