New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Non-investing personal finance issues including insurance, credit, real estate, taxes, employment and legal issues such as trusts and wills
Post Reply
Topic Author
Material Guy
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 12:28 pm

New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Material Guy »

This could be a game changer for TV cord cutters and for people wanting to get rid of cable TV. YouTube has announced a $35 per month TV subscription service with local channels and DVR to be available later this year.
Texanbybirth
Posts: 1398
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 12:07 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Texanbybirth »

I've currently got DirecTV NOW (signed up for the promo price, got a free FireStick) and am really just holding it for a couple months trial, or until my wife tells me to cancel it. I haven't watched that much so I'm not really sure if I'll keep it. We really just watch Netflix.

It seems like the cable TV market is getting seriously disrupted these days. I hadn't even heard of services like Sling or Playstation VUE until just reading about all this.

Getting local TV in my area is tough through an antenna, as we're just out of "Strong" signal strength for most channels. Having them digitally would be nice.
“The strong cannot be brave. Only the weak can be brave; and yet again, in practice, only those who can be brave can be trusted, in time of doubt, to be strong.“ - GK Chesterton
jebmke
Posts: 11643
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:44 pm
Location: Delmarva Peninsula

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by jebmke »

according to NBCNews
initially limited to a few cities where it has deals with broadcasters.
When you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.
TravelGeek
Posts: 3835
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 3:23 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by TravelGeek »

None of these "TV over internet" services seems to offer ultimate flexibility. I don't want a package of channels (many of which I won't ever watch), I want to select what I know I will watch. Or is there one that offers this flexibility?
rolandtorres
Posts: 131
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2016 8:44 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by rolandtorres »

TravelGeek wrote:None of these "TV over internet" services seems to offer ultimate flexibility. I don't want a package of channels (many of which I won't ever watch), I want to select what I know I will watch. Or is there one that offers this flexibility?
This will either never happen or be so expensive per channel that the bundle will look like a bargain. If you are willing to wait a year, you can just rent/buy the shows you want on Netflix, Amazon. $35 is decent value for either service, it will only go up until the whole pay tv ecosystem breaks.
furwut
Posts: 1687
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 8:54 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by furwut »

Are you truly getting the local channels or are you getting the network feed? I thought some of the franchised station owners were not in favor of allowing their content to be streamed. Might matter if you want to watch the local news.
TravelGeek
Posts: 3835
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 3:23 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by TravelGeek »

rolandtorres wrote:
This will either never happen or be so expensive per channel that the bundle will look like a bargain. If you are willing to wait a year, you can just rent/buy the shows you want on Netflix, Amazon. $35 is decent value for either service, it will only go up until the whole pay tv ecosystem breaks.
I looked at the Sling TV offering recently. $20/month for 30 channels. I am interested in six of them. I am not willing to pay $20 for those six channels, though, so they aren't getting anything from me. There is still plenty for me to watch on Netflix and Amazon Prime (I very selectively "buy" shows on Amazon), and I have seven HD OTA channels for free for the local channels/networks and PBS.
BFive55
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2017 8:21 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by BFive55 »

I hate cord cutters. How do you think the networks pay for the shows they make? By charging the cable companies a fee to carry their channels.

This is literally a "cut off your nose to spite your face" situation. A la cart doesn't work either. You may not watch channel XYZ but I do. Just like I may not watch channel ZZZ but you do. Our cable bills pays for the less popular channels as well that me or you might actually watch.
TravelGeek wrote:None of these "TV over internet" services seems to offer ultimate flexibility. I don't want a package of channels (many of which I won't ever watch), I want to select what I know I will watch. Or is there one that offers this flexibility?
The thing is, by you and me paying say, $100/month for 100 channels and only watching 10 or 15, it's keeping YOU or ME from paying $150/month for 10 or 15 channels we actually watch.

Because you're going to want to watch a channel that isn't all that popular. Instead of sharing the cost burden among all subscribers and the channel only costing say, $0.50 per subscriber, now you're paying $10/month for that one specific channel. Plus whatever else for the rest of your channels. The most popular channels can charge a cable TV provided around $5-7 to carry them, I believe. ESPN makes a killing for example, while TruTV may be a little harder to demand more than like $0.50. But if you like watching something on TruTV you're not gonna have to pay a lot for it.

Also, if you think going a la cart will save you money, no way. If ESPN could demand $20/month per subscriber they would. If they have no cable company preventing them from keeping costs low (yes, the cable company actually does negotiate the prices because THEY don't want the bill they send to their customers to go up, because that leads to cord cutting, too) you'll get charged as much as they can demand.

Look at how much those NFL packages cost. They're ridiculous. But in the Church of Football which is America's #1 religion people will pay. And the NFL knows it so they can charge you an arm and a leg.

The benefits of a la cart sound good until people start actually selecting the channels they want. then it adds up. When I moved I looked at various "bundles" like a news bundle, an action network bundle, etc. and once I had selected it it came out to like $5/month less than if I just selected the bog standard bundles which had a bunch more TV channels for just mere dollars more a month.
onourway
Posts: 2707
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by onourway »

TravelGeek wrote: I looked at the Sling TV offering recently. $20/month for 30 channels. I am interested in six of them. I am not willing to pay $20 for those six channels, though, so they aren't getting anything from me. There is still plenty for me to watch on Netflix and Amazon Prime (I very selectively "buy" shows on Amazon), and I have seven HD OTA channels for free for the local channels/networks and PBS.
Look at how much individual subscriptions cost. Between $5-15/month. I can't see any of them going below $5. So you pay $20 for 6 channels you watch and 24 you don't, or you pay $30-50 for just the 6 channels you want...
User avatar
simplesimon
Posts: 3965
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 8:53 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by simplesimon »

BFive55 wrote:I hate cord cutters. How do you think the networks pay for the shows they make? By charging the cable companies a fee to carry their channels.

This is literally a "cut off your nose to spite your face" situation. A la cart doesn't work either. You may not watch channel XYZ but I do. Just like I may not watch channel ZZZ but you do. Our cable bills pays for the less popular channels as well that me or you might actually watch.
How is this a cut-off-your-nose situation? I can see why someone who loves watching a niche and less popular channel may be upset but for the majority of people this is a win.
User avatar
ebeard
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 5:51 pm
Location: Jacksonville, FL

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by ebeard »

BFive55 wrote:I hate cord cutters. How do you think the networks pay for the shows they make? By charging the cable companies a fee to carry their channels.
Networks like ABC, NBC, CBS, etc. make money through advertisements. By some accounts their gross margins are 36-89%. see: http://csimarket.com/Industry/industry_ ... hp?ind=902

Cable companies make money by selling subscriptions and advertisements. see: https://www.stock-analysis-on.net/NASDA ... s/Revenues
3 core funds. Don't just do something, stand there.
User avatar
Midpack
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:34 am
Location: Chicagoland

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Midpack »

Material Guy wrote:This could be a game changer for TV cord cutters and for people wanting to get rid of cable TV. YouTube has announced a $35 per month TV subscription service with local channels and DVR to be available later this year.
PlayStation Vue already does all that in 7 major metro areas for $39.99/mo (without OTA), and $29.99 in 203 other metro areas without live local major networks. But it sounds like the YouTube TV package will just make cord cutting viable for even more people. Good for most viewers.
You only live once...
User avatar
Midpack
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:34 am
Location: Chicagoland

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Midpack »

furwut wrote:Are you truly getting the local channels or are you getting the network feed? I thought some of the franchised station owners were not in favor of allowing their content to be streamed. Might matter if you want to watch the local news.
I'll bet it's the actual local feed. PlayStation Vue already does this in 7 metro areas, and it IS the local channels - not a national network feed.
You only live once...
User avatar
Midpack
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:34 am
Location: Chicagoland

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Midpack »

BFive55 wrote:I hate cord cutters. How do you think the networks pay for the shows they make? By charging the cable companies a fee to carry their channels.

This is literally a "cut off your nose to spite your face" situation. A la cart doesn't work either. You may not watch channel XYZ but I do. Just like I may not watch channel ZZZ but you do. Our cable bills pays for the less popular channels as well that me or you might actually watch.

The thing is, by you and me paying say, $100/month for 100 channels and only watching 10 or 15, it's keeping YOU or ME from paying $150/month for 10 or 15 channels we actually watch.
I'm thrilled to see cord cutting rapidly picking up steam, it will only give us all more choices.

Why should I pay a huge premium, double or triple, to subsidize your viewing choices? I've done that long enough, time for you to pay for your own niche channels if you want them.

Bloated high cost cable/satellite packages and a la carte aren't the only choices - that's where your argument falls apart.

For $35-$40/mo I can get 40+ channels with most if not all the channels I want including local live majors with cloud DVR and access on more devices with PlayStation Vue or YouTube TV in a few months. Or for $20/mo I can get 40+ channels with most if not all the channels I want with an OTA and Sling TV.
You only live once...
DayOldTacos
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 2:12 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by DayOldTacos »

BFive55 wrote:I hate cord cutters. How do you think the networks pay for the shows they make? By charging the cable companies a fee to carry their channels.
Cable companies make majority of revenue through advertising. I was a cord cutter. Why should pay $100/month for something I rarely used? $10/month for Netflix provided me with plenty of entertainment. When I did decide to enjoy cable TV again, I signed up with SlingTV. Again, why would I ever pay $100/month when I can pay $20/month and to watch the same channels that interest me? Makes cable sound like a bogus deal.
User avatar
Clever_Username
Posts: 1751
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 12:24 am
Location: Southern California

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Clever_Username »

Are we allowed reaction GIFs on this forum? If not, please imagine the one of Patrick Peterson dressed as a dinosaur and running around to gauge my reaction.

$35 is a bit steep ... but far better than cable, and I trust Google (to keep the price at a good point and to not have bizarre hidden fees) a lot more than any cable company. It may be worth it if I get to choose which of the basic channels I get; can I get the Phoenix FOX affiliate or am I stuck with the L.A. one? That may be the deal that makes this worth it for me (especially the last four months of the year).
"What was true then is true now. Have a plan. Stick to it." -- XXXX, _Layer Cake_ | | I survived my first downturn and all I got was this signature line.
montee4
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 6:32 am

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by montee4 »

I watch too much Discovery and TLC to not be able to have it. Right now DirecTVNow and Playstation Vue are my only options. If Google can add them, I would switch to them.

I have an HD antenna so the locals aren't that important to me as I can use the antenna to get what I need.
User avatar
Midpack
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:34 am
Location: Chicagoland

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Midpack »

Here's what YouTube TV is proposing as of today.

Image
You only live once...
User avatar
simplesimon
Posts: 3965
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 8:53 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by simplesimon »

Having so many choices is great and people should be able to pay for what they want, but I think most people vastly overestimate how much time they have on their hands to watch stuff. Fifty years ago a tv package had a handful of channels and today you can get over 200 channels. As far as I know, the number of hours in the day hasn't increased.

The economics of niche channels just don't make sense and the only reason they were able to exist was because of subsidization. If anything, it's services like Netflix, Amazon Prime, and YouTube that have allowed producers of niche categories connect with consumers interested in them.
User avatar
Midpack
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:34 am
Location: Chicagoland

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Midpack »

simplesimon wrote:Having so many choices is great and people should be able to pay for what they want, but I think most people vastly overestimate how much time they have on their hands to watch stuff. Fifty years ago a tv package had a handful of channels and today you can get over 200 channels. As far as I know, the number of hours in the day hasn't increased.
+1. We have friends and a BIL who both pay $270/mo for TV alone, with the biggest channel packages plus sports and movie add ons, and on demand libraries. And they have Netflix and Amazon too. I can't imagine, but it's their money...
You only live once...
health teacher
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 7:27 am

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by health teacher »

The key to all of this, in my opinion, is how companies like Comcast advertise bundles for TV internet for $99 a month which doesn't seem awful, but after 12 months prices go up, you are paying for equipment rental and DVR which can add $40-50 to the bill and it gets ridiculous.

I cut 2 years ago and I get the subsidizing argument, but quite honestly, in my mind, I wasn't desperately searching for ways to get everything I watched on cable. I picked one package that was a must for me (NHL.tv) kept my wife and kids happy with Hulu and Netflix and bam, I saved $150 a month. AND I don't have to waste my time with ridiculous ads.. 17 minutes for an hour show, screw that. What we will see, and it's already started, is sports services like NHL.tv showing commercials during traditional TV timeouts and other channels showing a few commercials during on demand show similar to what Hulu does.

It won't be this cheap forever as the cord cutters/nevers continue to take up the market share, but there will be healthy competition to keep costs low. Sure the actors might take a small hit in all this as there might be less money for production, but passionate people will still make brilliant content in my opinion. I knew going into teaching wouldn't make me rich, but I still chose it and I'm still passionate about it. The same will hold true with the TV industry. This is just like what happened in the music industry. The consumers are gaining control and I like it.

Finally, I won't add this YouTube service. I would think this targets future cord cutters who want an easier transition and cord nevers who might want to see what 90's TV was all about.
Dottie57
Posts: 9311
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 5:43 pm
Location: Earth Northern Hemisphere

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Dottie57 »

Cable companies make a lot of money.

My condo associaton pays < $40 per unit for ech condo. We are billed through our association fees. Everyone has cable.

My mom pays over $100 a month for the same lineup of channels. The amount she pays is obscene.
tj
Posts: 3719
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 12:10 am

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by tj »

health teacher wrote:The key to all of this, in my opinion, is how companies like Comcast advertise bundles for TV internet for $99 a month which doesn't seem awful, but after 12 months prices go up, you are paying for equipment rental and DVR which can add $40-50 to the bill and it gets ridiculous.

I cut 2 years ago and I get the subsidizing argument, but quite honestly, in my mind, I wasn't desperately searching for ways to get everything I watched on cable. I picked one package that was a must for me (NHL.tv) kept my wife and kids happy with Hulu and Netflix and bam, I saved $150 a month. AND I don't have to waste my time with ridiculous ads.. 17 minutes for an hour show, screw that. What we will see, and it's already started, is sports services like NHL.tv showing commercials during traditional TV timeouts and other channels showing a few commercials during on demand show similar to what Hulu does.

It won't be this cheap forever as the cord cutters/nevers continue to take up the market share, but there will be healthy competition to keep costs low. Sure the actors might take a small hit in all this as there might be less money for production, but passionate people will still make brilliant content in my opinion. I knew going into teaching wouldn't make me rich, but I still chose it and I'm still passionate about it. The same will hold true with the TV industry. This is just like what happened in the music industry. The consumers are gaining control and I like it.

Finally, I won't add this YouTube service. I would think this targets future cord cutters who want an easier transition and cord nevers who might want to see what 90's TV was all about.
What about the Stanley Cup Playoffs? Do you subscribe to one of the other services during that time? NHL.TV only includes regular season and only out of market.

I love seeing all this competition here with a 4th option being added to the mix. I have never had any interest in Netflix myself, the shows I watch stream for free on their networks website, I mostly would want paid tv for the live sports. All these streaming options drastically reduce the cost but my fear is that eventually the internet companies will charge for bandwidth by the Gigabyte bringing the cost of streaming entertainment almost exactly the same as bundled cable.
TravelGeek
Posts: 3835
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 3:23 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by TravelGeek »

Midpack wrote:Here's what YouTube TV is proposing as of today.

Image
So of these channels I would be somewhat interested in occasionally watching

USA
FX
Bravo
Syfy
NatGeo
MSNBC

(based on two year old data of what some of these show; I would probably do a bit more research to see if, say, Bravo, pivoted or NatGeo was "foxified"). I don't care about the five networks (ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, CW) because I get them OTA.

I can see if someone cared about TV sports, the ESPN and other sports channels might be interesting. I am not interested in paying a dime for those.

There is no way, however, that I would pay $35/month for these six channels. Sorry, Google, no deal.
User avatar
simplesimon
Posts: 3965
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 8:53 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by simplesimon »

tj wrote:All these streaming options drastically reduce the cost but my fear is that eventually the internet companies will charge for bandwidth by the Gigabyte bringing the cost of streaming entertainment almost exactly the same as bundled cable.
Good point and it's something to keep an eye on especially if net neutrality gets taken away.
Nick341981
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2015 1:47 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Nick341981 »

BFive55 wrote:I hate cord cutters. How do you think the networks pay for the shows they make? By charging the cable companies a fee to carry their channels.

This is literally a "cut off your nose to spite your face" situation. A la cart doesn't work either. You may not watch channel XYZ but I do. Just like I may not watch channel ZZZ but you do. Our cable bills pays for the less popular channels as well that me or you might actually watch.
TravelGeek wrote:None of these "TV over internet" services seems to offer ultimate flexibility. I don't want a package of channels (many of which I won't ever watch), I want to select what I know I will watch. Or is there one that offers this flexibility?
The thing is, by you and me paying say, $100/month for 100 channels and only watching 10 or 15, it's keeping YOU or ME from paying $150/month for 10 or 15 channels we actually watch.

Because you're going to want to watch a channel that isn't all that popular. Instead of sharing the cost burden among all subscribers and the channel only costing say, $0.50 per subscriber, now you're paying $10/month for that one specific channel. Plus whatever else for the rest of your channels. The most popular channels can charge a cable TV provided around $5-7 to carry them, I believe. ESPN makes a killing for example, while TruTV may be a little harder to demand more than like $0.50. But if you like watching something on TruTV you're not gonna have to pay a lot for it.

Also, if you think going a la cart will save you money, no way. If ESPN could demand $20/month per subscriber they would. If they have no cable company preventing them from keeping costs low (yes, the cable company actually does negotiate the prices because THEY don't want the bill they send to their customers to go up, because that leads to cord cutting, too) you'll get charged as much as they can demand.

Look at how much those NFL packages cost. They're ridiculous. But in the Church of Football which is America's #1 religion people will pay. And the NFL knows it so they can charge you an arm and a leg.

The benefits of a la cart sound good until people start actually selecting the channels they want. then it adds up. When I moved I looked at various "bundles" like a news bundle, an action network bundle, etc. and once I had selected it it came out to like $5/month less than if I just selected the bog standard bundles which had a bunch more TV channels for just mere dollars more a month.
Big fan of socialism in all areas or just tv?
User avatar
susa
Posts: 599
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 4:30 pm
Contact:

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by susa »

For the folks who use Hulu, Netflix and similar, do you still have a Basic Cable for Internet service, for example Comcast internet only ? As I understand it, you get your subscriptions from the outside service but need a wifi feed inside your home. Or are you able to completely cut the cable also ?

As to ATT or Comcast, we have ongoing subs based on location with both. One item in Comcast favor has been that if you maintain and purchase your own routers, repeaters and modems, you are able to negotiate a little. We normally renew a 24 month so called starter pack with 75mbs internet and about 300 plus channels (we do not watch TV, including any sports, don't have the time or interest). Comcast waives the HD technology fee for 24 months and the monthly bill is 89.99 plus the various broadcast, sports fees plus various taxes added.
User avatar
Nate79
Posts: 6519
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 6:24 pm
Location: Delaware

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Nate79 »

susa wrote:For the folks who use Hulu, Netflix and similar, do you still have a Basic Cable for Internet service, for example Comcast internet only ? As I understand it, you get your subscriptions from the outside service but need a wifi feed inside your home. Or are you able to completely cut the cable also ?

As to ATT or Comcast, we have ongoing subs based on location with both. One item in Comcast favor has been that if you maintain and purchase your own routers, repeaters and modems, you are able to negotiate a little. We normally renew a 24 month so called starter pack with 75mbs internet and about 300 plus channels (we do not watch TV, including any sports, don't have the time or interest). Comcast waives the HD technology fee for 24 months and the monthly bill is 89.99 plus the various broadcast, sports fees plus various taxes added.
Services offered on the Internet, whether watching Netflix, Hulu, or YouTube require an Internet connection. So yes, you need Internet service from some provider.
User avatar
Midpack
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:34 am
Location: Chicagoland

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Midpack »

Nate79 wrote:
susa wrote:For the folks who use Hulu, Netflix and similar, do you still have a Basic Cable for Internet service, for example Comcast internet only ? As I understand it, you get your subscriptions from the outside service but need a wifi feed inside your home. Or are you able to completely cut the cable also ?

As to ATT or Comcast, we have ongoing subs based on location with both. One item in Comcast favor has been that if you maintain and purchase your own routers, repeaters and modems, you are able to negotiate a little. We normally renew a 24 month so called starter pack with 75mbs internet and about 300 plus channels (we do not watch TV, including any sports, don't have the time or interest). Comcast waives the HD technology fee for 24 months and the monthly bill is 89.99 plus the various broadcast, sports fees plus various taxes added.
Services offered on the Internet, whether watching Netflix, Hulu, or YouTube require an Internet connection. So yes, you need Internet service from some provider.
Like he said...internet service and a Smart TV at a minimum, though you can adapt some dumb TVs with a streaming device.
  • Many people use a streaming devices anyway like Roku, Apple TV or Amazon Fire TV. Chromecast is a less expensive streaming device, but you'd have to have a tablet and/or smartphone to use it - Roku, Apple TV and Amazon Fire have their own remotes and an onscreen UI (user interface).
  • Most people would probably use WiFi to access Hulu, but you may be able to connect directly with Ethernet.
You only live once...
User avatar
knpstr
Posts: 2890
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:57 pm
Location: Michigan

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by knpstr »

I'm happy to see this change in the marketplace. But I'll stick with my OTA antenna and $19.99/mo Sling service for now
:beer
Very little is needed to make a happy life; it is all within yourself, in your way of thinking. -Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
5th_Dimension
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 1:05 am

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by 5th_Dimension »

When I called to cancel my DirecTV service of course they asked my why. I told them I was tired of paying for ESPN, a channel I never watch, but which accounted for roughly 10% of my bill. I swore that I would never again pay for ESPN. Looking at these streaming bundles it looks like they all have ESPN. No thanks.
Pick up a penny and soon you'll have many.
User avatar
FelixTheCat
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2011 12:39 am

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by FelixTheCat »

susa wrote:For the folks who use Hulu, Netflix and similar, do you still have a Basic Cable for Internet service, for example Comcast internet only ? As I understand it, you get your subscriptions from the outside service but need a wifi feed inside your home. Or are you able to completely cut the cable also ?
I have Time Warner (forgot the new name) internet. Hulu, Netflix and HBO (Game of Thrones). I don't miss cable nor the fees I used to pay.
Felix is a wonderful, wonderful cat.
health teacher
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 7:27 am

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by health teacher »

tj wrote:
What about the Stanley Cup Playoffs? Do you subscribe to one of the other services during that time? NHL.TV only includes regular season and only out of market.
I happen to pay for a DNS service to protect my privacy online and an indirect benefit of that is somehow the NHL playoffs showed up on my NHL.tv account last year. Many games are broadcast on NBC which I get OTA, or I have a buddy come over and we use his cable credentials to watch it via the NBC Sports channel on Roku and worst case, I'd go somewhere to watch playoff games if I was desperate.
sco
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2015 2:28 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by sco »

My mother called me a couple weeks ago. She is cutting the cord. She was stuck with a cable company that wanted well over $200 mth for basic cable.
Condo/Apartment options are limited and they know it. She consistently watches 3 shows and then the local news.

There was no cheaper package, so she is trying to cut the cord.
Jackson12
Posts: 1022
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Jackson12 »

TravelGeek wrote:None of these "TV over internet" services seems to offer ultimate flexibility. I don't want a package of channels (many of which I won't ever watch), I want to select what I know I will watch. Or is there one that offers this flexibility?
Sure, you can select specific channels, depending on which ones offer stand alone packages. More and more do all the time. HBO,Showtime, Starz, Sundance, Acorn, etc.

While the YouTube service doesn't currently appeal to me due to its current mix of channels, the advantage of various streaming options is being able to ditch expensive cable channel packages and choose what works for a specific person or family.

Some people decide to use an option like an Amazon Fire stick which has a one time fee and allows free access to Amazon Prime movies, rental movies, etc. You can also subscribe to specific channels there such as Sundance, Starz, Showtime, etc.

Or you can rent a current tv show at Amazon, one playing on a channel like FX or NBC, etc. Buying a season pass for a show is usually far cheaper than paying for a cable channel package.

Some people go with other stand alone services like Hulu ( which has some sports channels) or HBO Now. There are so many choices out there.

You really have to crunch the numbers but can certainly save plenty by cobbling together your own package rather than paying for a ton of channels you never watch.

What is really great is how any services (Netflix, Amazon, Esquire, etc) are creating original content. Manchester by the Sea, an Oscar nominee, was created by Amazon.
Jackson12
Posts: 1022
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Jackson12 »

DayOldTacos wrote:
BFive55 wrote:I hate cord cutters. How do you think the networks pay for the shows they make? By charging the cable companies a fee to carry their channels.
Cable companies make majority of revenue through advertising. I was a cord cutter. Why should pay $100/month for something I rarely used? $10/month for Netflix provided me with plenty of entertainment. When I did decide to enjoy cable TV again, I signed up with SlingTV. Again, why would I ever pay $100/month when I can pay $20/month and to watch the same channels that interest me? Makes cable sound like a bogus deal.
And that's exactly the point. Cord cutters can select only the shows or channels they watch. Maybe some people have 15 hours a day to watch tv but I don't ...so I would rather save money and get the option I want. This might not work for someone who watches many cable channels.

But the cable companies are feeling the heat, A friend was offered a $100 savings to keep a basic package plus a free premium channel. That worked for him and not only saved money but ditched the channels he never watched. He chose HBO as his premium channel
chuckb84
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 10:41 am
Location: New Mexico

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by chuckb84 »

simplesimon wrote:
tj wrote:All these streaming options drastically reduce the cost but my fear is that eventually the internet companies will charge for bandwidth by the Gigabyte bringing the cost of streaming entertainment almost exactly the same as bundled cable.
Good point and it's something to keep an eye on especially if net neutrality gets taken away.
It's already happening, as Comcast has imposed a 1,000 Gigabyte (1Tbyte) cap per month in almost all service areas. Sounds like a HUGE amount of data, right? Well, directvnow streaming uses about 5 Gigabytes/hour, so that's 200 hours of TV, or 6 hours a day. Two TVs? Now it's 3 hours a day on each one, and after that you'll pay $50 more to Comcast.

It'll get much worse if you watch 4K TV, 4 times worse, so your 6 hours of HDTV/day will drop to 1.5 hours, or 45 minutes/day if you have two TVs.

We have directvnow, 2 phones, 2 laptops, and stream pandora music. We routinely hit 600 Gigabytes/month. I think a family with kids and several TVs would easily go over 1T/month.
Jackson12
Posts: 1022
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Jackson12 »

chuckb84 wrote:
simplesimon wrote:
tj wrote:All these streaming options drastically reduce the cost but my fear is that eventually the internet companies will charge for bandwidth by the Gigabyte bringing the cost of streaming entertainment almost exactly the same as bundled cable.
Good point and it's something to keep an eye on especially if net neutrality gets taken away.
It's already happening, as Comcast has imposed a 1,000 Gigabyte (1Tbyte) cap per month in almost all service areas. Sounds like a HUGE amount of data, right? Well, directvnow streaming uses about 5 Gigabytes/hour, so that's 200 hours of TV, or 6 hours a day. Two TVs? Now it's 3 hours a day on each one, and after that you'll pay $50 more to Comcast.

It'll get much worse if you watch 4K TV, 4 times worse, so your 6 hours of HDTV/day will drop to 1.5 hours, or 45 minutes/day if you have two TVs.


With a Fire or Chrome stick, you can even go to a hotel in another city, plug the stick into a tv port and watch your cable programs. You are then using the hotel bandwidth, right?

Or if you go to a nearby friend or relative's house, someone who watches limited tv and never comes close to their data cap, take along your stick or device and your password and then aren't you're in business? .

You can even connect your iPad to a port and stream directly to the tv ( if you have no other mirroring options)

I realize these examples are extreme and not nearly as convenient as home viewing

I could be wrong in my assumptions as I'm no tech expert


We have directvnow, 2 phones, 2 laptops, and stream pandora music. We routinely hit 600 Gigabytes/month. I think a family with kids and several TVs would easily go over 1T/month.
Last edited by Jackson12 on Thu Mar 02, 2017 4:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
TravelGeek
Posts: 3835
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 3:23 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by TravelGeek »

Jackson12 wrote: Sure, you can select specific channels, depending on which ones offer stand alone packages. More and more do all the time. HBO,Showtime, Starz, Sundance, Acorn, etc.
But many don't. Where can I buy just CNN or MSNBC? Or AMC? They all let you stream if you have a TV subscription from a cable/sat provider (using the cable provider login for authentication), but don't sell a standalone subscription.

Besides, I really don't want to cobble together my limited channel selection with ten different apps.

I suspect eventually the likes of Youtube will unbundle the channels. Until then, yes, I am either just not watching a particular channel (seems I can survive that) or buy individual current shows on Amazon (Walking Dead, The Americans) or wait until they are "free" on Amazon or Netflix.
With a Fire or Chrome stick, you can even go to a hotel in another city, plug the stick into a tv port and watch your cable programs. You are then using the hotel bandwidth, right?
Yes you would, but it's not quite that easy unfortunately.

https://www.howtogeek.com/195762/ask-ht ... otel-room/
Jackson12
Posts: 1022
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Jackson12 »

TravelGeek wrote:
Jackson12 wrote: Sure, you can select specific channels, depending on which ones offer stand alone packages. More and more do all the time. HBO,Showtime, Starz, Sundance, Acorn, etc.
But many don't. Where can I buy just CNN or MSNBC? Or AMC? They all let you stream if you have a TV subscription from a cable/sat provider (using the cable provider login for authentication), but don't sell a standalone subscription.

Besides, I really don't want to cobble together my limited channel selection with ten different apps.

I suspect eventually the likes of Youtube will unbundle the channels. Until then, yes, I am either just not watching a particular channel (seems I can survive that) or buy individual current shows on Amazon (Walking Dead, The Americans) or wait until they are "free" on Amazon or Netflix.
With a Fire or Chrome stick, you can even go to a hotel in another city, plug the stick into a tv port and watch your cable programs. You are then using the hotel bandwidth, right?
Yes you would, but it's not quite that easy unfortunately.

https://www.howtogeek.com/195762/ask-ht ... otel-room/

I just do this -not an elegant solution but effective : Use an HDMI cable, hook it up to a laptop or iPad ( you can buy special and inexpensive cables that work with iPads or,other devices) and then plug it into the HDMI port on the back of the hotel television. I've never tried it with Chrome cast or Fire sticks..
TravelGeek
Posts: 3835
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 3:23 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by TravelGeek »

Jackson12 wrote: I just do this -not an elegant solution but effective : Use an HDMI cable, hook it up to a laptop or iPad ( you can buy special and inexpensive cables that work with iPads or,other devices) and then plug it into the HDMI port on the back of the hotel television. I've never tried it with Chrome cast or Fire sticks..
Yes, that is my low-tech solution as well.. I have a travel router (for other reasons) but usually don't want to travel with it. And I rarely travel with my laptop these days. So a simple low-tech cable it is.

(btw, what's with that "moderator red" font color :confused )
JGoneRiding
Posts: 1970
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 3:26 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by JGoneRiding »

Midpack wrote:Here's what YouTube TV is proposing as of today.

Image
I would pay 35/mos for that package but doubt its avilable to me :( so i cut the cord and just get netflix. We have no other tv at all
Jackson12
Posts: 1022
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by Jackson12 »

TravelGeek wrote:
Jackson12 wrote: I just do this -not an elegant solution but effective : Use an HDMI cable, hook it up to a laptop or iPad ( you can buy special and inexpensive cables that work with iPads or,other devices) and then plug it into the HDMI port on the back of the hotel television. I've never tried it with Chrome cast or Fire sticks..
Yes, that is my low-tech solution as well.. I have a travel router (for other reasons) but usually don't want to travel with it. And I rarely travel with my laptop these days. So a simple low-tech cable it is.

(btw, what's with that "moderator red" font color :confused ). I 'm sorry about the color. I didn't realize it was a moderator thing. I'll try to go back and change it... and I tried ..and it didn't take. I guess I'm better with routers than font colors :oops: g
Last edited by Jackson12 on Thu Mar 02, 2017 4:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.
TigerNest
Posts: 362
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 12:58 pm

Re: New YouTube TV Service $35 per month

Post by TigerNest »

We have a Roku and love it. With Netflix, HBONow, and Amazon there's always a great show to watch. We haven't subscribed to cable in many years (we are in our early/mid 30s).

It's nice to see the skinny bundles, but upon reflection I realize I'm not going to subscribe because I'm no longer interested in live TV at all. I wonder how many of my fellow millenial cord cutters feel the same way. I was provided DirectTV on a flight for free once, and it was terrible. After so many years without live TV, I find it really annoying to not be able to choose what you want to watch & when you want to watch it.
Post Reply