YouTube TV hikes monthly subscription price to $65

AppleInsiderAppleInsider
Posted:
in General Discussion
YouTube TV is undergoing yet another price hike as the company adds more channels to its existing lineup.

YouTube TV hikes monthly price to $65


Those who subscribe to YouTube TV will see a 30% price hike on their next bill. Effective immediately, those who subscribe to the service will pay $64.99, or nearly double what users at launch paid.

According to a blog post from YouTube, the price hike is necessary as they're adding new features and more content. A new news feature will allow users to jump to various clips within news programming. They've also expanded DVR features, allowing users to pause, rewind, and fast-forward through recorded shows, regardless of network.

Regarding content, YouTube has now secured the right to broadcast ViacomCBS's family of brands. Now included in the YouTube TV subscription are eight new channels: BET, CMT, Comedy Central, MTV, Nickelodeon, Paramount Network, TV Land, and VH1.

The post also mentions that six additional channels (BET Her, MTV2, MTV Classic, Nick Jr., NickToons, and TeenNick) will be coming to the service later.

Currently, YouTube features over 85+ channels and features several additional channels that can be purchased for an additional monthly cost.

YouTube TV launched in February of 2017, with a relatively reasonable cost of $35 per month for 40 channels. However, it didn't take long for the service to start regularly hiking prices -- one of the reasons many cord-cutters were abandoning traditional cable service providers.

In April of 2018, YouTube TV hiked prices to $49.99 as they'd signed on several channels under the Discovery, Inc. umbrella. '

In February, Google's YouTube unit informed YouTube TV customers of a change in policy that will see a discontinuation of subscriptions purchased through Apple's in-app payments mechanism, forcing users to subscribe elsewhere or cancel the service.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 54
    payecopayeco Posts: 581member
    You might as well just pay for cable at this point. You can probably get a promotional rate from the cable company for less than this.
    BeatsStrangeDaysmike1shaminostevenozdysamorialolliverMplsPdoozydozenradarthekat
  • Reply 2 of 54
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    Who pays that much for this crap?
    StrangeDaysdysamorialolliverdoozydozenradarthekatmtrivisolarryawilliamlondonGeorgeBMacwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 54
    lightvox88lightvox88 Posts: 29member
    Exactly. It was already more than cable before, and now it's just ridiculous. 30% increase!?! Who would be interested in this? People with money to burn...
    BeatsStrangeDaysdysamorialolliverradarthekatmtrivisowilliamlondonGeorgeBMacwatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 54
    randominternetpersonrandominternetperson Posts: 3,089member
    I thought that had to be a typo.  $65 per month??
    StrangeDaysSpamSandwichdysamorialolliverdoozydozenradarthekatmtrivisoGeorgeBMacchasmwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 54
    digitoldigitol Posts: 276member
    LOL RIP OFF!!!  **public service announcement** BTW If you use Sarari, try  Wipr and or adgaurd (green icon) and Youtube experience becomes much better. Also "StopTheMadness" is fantastic for Safari. /EndPublicSeriviceAnnouncement.
    Beatslkruppdysamoriacornchipmatrix077doozydozenmike54mtrivisowilliamlondon
  • Reply 6 of 54
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 12,877member
    LOL what a joke. from 40 channels for a modest $35, to almost 100 channels at $65 -- exactly what people didn't want in the first place. More crap, bigger price. And a 30% single increase? Nuts!

    Google has lost the script.
    edited June 2020 hcrefugeedysamorialollivercornchipdoozydozenradarthekatmtrivisolarryawilliamlondonlordjohnwhorfin
  • Reply 7 of 54
    Nikon8Nikon8 Posts: 47member
    There are people paying for this?  
    Beatsdysamorialolliverradarthekatwatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 54
    strellsstrells Posts: 20member
    Ugh.  Unless they add ad-free YouTube to this without having to get the separate YouTube Premium, it just doesn't seem worth it.
    mtrivisowatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 54
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    StrangeDays said:
    LOL what a joke. from 40 channels for a modest $35, to almost 100 channels at $65 -- exactly what people didn't want in the first place. More crap, bigger price. And a 30% single increase? Nuts!

    Google has lost the script.

    I'll bet more people are paying for TV+. People will call Apple a "Failure" and conveniently ignore Google's graveyard.
    lolliverradarthekatmtrivisochasmwatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 54
    ericesqueericesque Posts: 28member
    lightvox88 said:
    Exactly. It was already more than cable before, and now it's just ridiculous. 30% increase!?! Who would be interested in this? People with money to burn...
    It can depend heavily on what’s available in your area. The ONLY cable option to our home is Comcast. 

    The cheapest package I can seem to get from Comcast is $80 once you add in hidden fees for HD content and local sports broadcast fees. This is literally double their advertised price. 

    YT TV isn’t what any of us hoped Internet TV would be, but it’s still 20% cheaper than Comcast for a significantly better lineup and features that would raise the price of a Comcast package even higher. 
    mtrivisowilliamlondonapplesauce007randominternetperson
  • Reply 11 of 54
    hcrefugeehcrefugee Posts: 98member
    I cut the cord to cut the bloat -- in channels and price. Now this? Paying for channels I'll never watch? Again? WTF.
    StrangeDayspumpkin_kinglollivercornchipmtrivisoGeorgeBMaclordjohnwhorfinwatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 54
    mike1mike1 Posts: 3,284member
    Wouldn't be great if there was a company that would pull together all these various networks and stations and distribute them through a single device that allowed me to record programming or watch them on demand? Oh wait...
    mtrivisowatto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 54
    LenardHLenardH Posts: 21member
    Everyone should look at the WHOLE channel lineup. Good news, there are not anymore channels to be added... No CONTRACTS..
    mtriviso
  • Reply 14 of 54
    libertyandfreelibertyandfree Posts: 157member
    So a 30% price jump to add 8 channels I will never ever watch.  The additional 8 channels is just cover so they can jack up the price again.  No way do those lame 8 channels cost anywhere near $15/month ($180/ year). 

    Still no History channel.  
    StrangeDaysstevenozmtrivisowatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 54
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    mike1 said:
    Wouldn't be great if there was a company that would pull together all these various networks and stations and distribute them through a single device that allowed me to record programming or watch them on demand? Oh wait...

    They don't wanna play together. Apple tried.
    cornchipmtriviso
  • Reply 16 of 54
    halhikerhalhiker Posts: 111member
    Great.  Add a bunch of channels I will never watch and jack up the price.  No thanks.  At that price, cable is cheaper and more convenient.  Who would have ever thought that to be possible?
    hcrefugeecornchipmtrivisowatto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 54
    mastericmasteric Posts: 89member
    I am paying less than $50 per month for DirecTV Entertainment package so paying $65 for You Tube TV is outrageous. 

    I am getting a monthly credit on a 12 month contract. I call when it runs out every year. Give me a good deal or I will just cancel (one day they will let me cancel and I'll just switch to Spectrum or something else that is offering a promo deal). They always give me a good deal. I have heard from people I know that they've done this and some get a credit and some don't. It seems they are doing less credits now though so I have no clue what their measuring stick is on who gets a discount and who doesn't. As long as they keep giving me the credit, I will keep renewing. I don't pay for any premium channels, but I do get HBO (and HBO MAX) for free for being an AT&T Wireless customer.
    cornchipmtrivisowatto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 54
    citpekscitpeks Posts: 246member
    The Content Cartel holds the cards.

    MSOs and general OTT service providers (as well as theater owners) are at their mercy.

    Not only is the Cartel hiking their carriage fees, and replaying the same game they do with the MSOs, now they're competing directly against you with their own services.  The YTs, Slings, etc. are middlemen, at best, unless they're big enough to buy their own seat at the table (NBCUni), WarnerMedia).

    Content is king, and to control your own destiny, you must produce your own.  Netflix and Amazon figured this out a while ago.  Apple saw it from the start.  But it takes lots of money, and a commitment.

    Google doesn't have it, nor do they think they need it; YT can get along without it, so don't be surprised if YTTV joins the litany of other products in the Google Graveyard at some point.  Sony has access to its own creative stream, but it would rather sell it to others wholesale, rather than dealing with the hassle and effort needed to sell Vue to the public.
    lollivermtriviso
  • Reply 19 of 54
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    How much does Goophabet lose on YouTube anyway?
    cornchipmtrivisowatto_cobra
  • Reply 20 of 54
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 2,351member
    StrangeDays said:
    LOL what a joke. from 40 channels for a modest $35, to almost 100 channels at $65 -- exactly what people didn't want in the first place. More crap, bigger price. And a 30% single increase? Nuts!

    Google has lost the script.
    $6-8 per channel seems more appealing. 
    stevenozmtriviso
Sign In or Register to comment.