Forum - View topic'YouTube Red' Subscription Plan to Launch With Ad-Free Video, Offline Viewing
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
zrnzle500
 Posts: 3768 |
|
|||
Unless Youtube makes its player not work with adblockers like Hulu did. I would suck if they did but it would be dumb of them not to if they have a ad-free subscription. |
||||
|
||||
killjoy_the
 Posts: 2471 |
|
|||
|
I understand the need for ads but don't like them so I use an ad-blocker. This kind of service is a great alternative for people who do want to support the company but don't like ads/want to support it more directly. I can't speak for the price because I'm out of touch with similar services like CR and Netflix, though. Hopefully it has a good backing by people.
|
||||
|
||||
Tuor_of_Gondolin
 Posts: 3524 Location: Bellevue, WA |
|
|||
|
1) Add ads.
2) Make users pay to remove ads. 3) -- Actually, you don't need this step. 4) Profit! |
||||
|
||||
|
Suena
Posts: 289 |
|
|||
|
Here's a little secret from someone who has put ads on several of their Youtube videos: Google doesn't pay you your ad revenue until you've accrued $100. I've been making videos and earning ad money off them for years now, but have never actually gotten a cent for them, because I haven't reached the $100 threshold yet. Just putting that out there.
|
||||
|
||||
walw6pK4Alo
 Posts: 9322 |
|
|||
|
Yeah, I can do that now, it's called downloading the video. There's enough grandmas out there who don't use AdBlock or flash video downloaders, so they'll just have to carry the burden. But this alleviates that, so now I care even less about ad revenue than I did before.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Crisha
Moderator
 Posts: 4290 |
|
|||
|
Once I started following several youtube Let's Players (RaedwulfGamer, LordMinion777, GaLm, GeekRemix), I turned the ad-blocker off on YT. Watching 30 seconds of ads? No biggie. I've actually been introduced to other interesting channels because of it. And there's one ad I specifically went searching for afterwards to rewatch.
I don't forsee myself subscribing to this, but it's possible I'll feel differently later. I'll just take a wait-and-see approach. |
||||
|
||||
yuna49
 Posts: 3804 |
|
|||
|
I'm about to start paying Hulu $12 to get rid of its ads and dropping Netflix. $10/month for YouTube makes no sense in comparison.
|
||||
|
||||
Wandering Samurai
 Posts: 875 Location: USA |
|
|||
|
I'm going to be very interested to see what the subscription numbers are, if Google even is willing to release them. But they might be embarrassed by the underwhelming number of signups they end up getting.
|
||||
|
||||
Ali07
 Posts: 3333 Location: Victoria, Australia |
|
|||
|
I hope this does well for them.
They won't be seeing my money, as I have no issue sitting through ads and no interest (at least from this initial announced lot) in the people that will be behind their "premium content". At the same time, I might only visit YouTube a few times a month...and I mostly watch fail videos. 
|
||||
|
||||
|
CandisWhite
Posts: 282 |
|
|||
It is an insult, and it should be. The cost of watching a video with ads is time; The producer has accepted advertising revenue to help pay for the cost of the video's production and is asking you, the viewer, to sit through an advertisement telling you about a product for sale. Ads have let people see more content than they ever could afford to otherwise; Paying for a subscription for EVERY content provider would either bankrupt most people or lead to them massively cutting down on their consumption, and would outright alienate people with low incomes. Think of it this way: How many people would continue to come to ANN if you were required to have a subscription to read anything? Looking at an ad asking you to think about going to see "Attack on Titan Part 2" is a lot cheaper and is in every person's budget. Movies, TV shows, articles, and songs, no matter how cheaply produced, do not come out of thin air; Someone created them and had to incur monetary, physical, and emotional, costs to do it. Those people need to be paid for their time and effort. If you choose not to consume what they put out, that is your business; If, however, you do, then you need to pay the amount that they ask for your right to view. So, yes, not paying your cost of admission, even in time, is on the same level as sneaking into the theatre. |
||||
|
||||
Blue Chocobo
 Posts: 17 |
|
|||
I completely agree. When you go to download a movie or a song online, the creator basically says, "You can download this, but in exchange, you need to pay us $X”. When you want to see a video on YouTube, whoever created it says, “You can watch this, but in exchange, you need to watch this other video clip first so I gain ad revenue”. If you decide that it isn't worth the "fee" to experience the content, then you don't have to pay it, but you also don't have the right to experience that content. Using an ad-blocker has exactly the same effect as pirating a movie. There's a legal difference in the fact that you can legally use ad-blockers, but morally I don't see any difference. |
||||
|
||||
Ambimunch
 Posts: 2012 |
|
|||
|
I'm just waiting for pirated downloads of the member exclusive content to be uploaded to regular youtube HAHA. Anyways, $120.00 will be staying in my pocket as adblock will continue to do its thing for me at no extra charge.
|
||||
|
||||
mglittlerobin
 Posts: 1071 |
|
|||
I totally expect "pirated" copiesof YouTube channels "Premium content" to start showing up for big channels, especially since YouTube downloading programs can rip any video on YouTube. I'm not paying anyrhing, I'm pefectly content with Netflix and Funimation for my streaming and I turn off adblock for YouTubers I like. |
||||
|
||||
|
samuelp
Industry Insider
Posts: 2245 Location: San Antonio, USA |
|
|||
But doesn't the same argument apply to, for example, channel flipping during the commercials while watching the good 'ole TV? Advertisements are a necessity, but unlike SVOD I do not think you can call them a "moral obligation". Ad blockers are a symptom of an advertisement industry which has yet to figure out/adjust to the rapid change in the way people consume media. The solution is not to convince people they are "stealing" if they don't watch ads or use technology to not watch ads, that simply won't work and in the end would be counter productive... The solution is some combination of making and distributing advertisements that are effective and yet are something which the average person does not mind consuming, and/or coming up with new and innovative ways to fund content production in the first place without traditional advertisements. Personally I like what places like twitch (and to some extent, youtube) are doing with channels and subscribers to individual content creators. I call it "cloud patronage" and it's similar to back in the renaissance where a single rich person would fund creation of art except instead of a single person it's a group of people around the world. So a fraction of supporters help fund creation of things that then can be consumed by a much greater number "for free". |
||||
|
||||
|
Fronzel
Posts: 1906 |
|
|||
|
You wouldn't download a car!!!!
|
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group