YouTube TV Price Increase

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Less choice is good, right?

Hulu + Live TV to Merge With Fubo, Ending Lawsuit Against Venu Sports Streaming Service

Disney Monday announced a new joint venture which will combine its Hulu + Live TV service with Fubo. As part of the deal, all litigation between the companies has been settled, with Fubo dropping its antitrust lawsuit against Venu, the sports-focused streaming package from Disney, Fox Corp. and...

www.aol.com

Disney taking a page out of the Microsoft and Google playbook: if they sue you, just buy their company.

 

[Firebirdparts]

The big four network shows are so bad now. Have any of you watched an NCIS lately. It's horrendous. My 9 year old could write a better script. Too bad I need them for sports.

I avoid it all very carefully, but we do see advertisements for network shows when watching football. Generally I'm pretty horrified.

Found a graph on this but it's out of date.

Sling used to be my go-to for football and it's now $46. I guess it's still true that there's an add-on for the SEC network and maybe even ESPN2.


At such point that people offer to let you pay for ESPN and NOTHING ELSE it'll be interesting to see what that costs.

 

[Dadof2Vols]

Believe it our not but streaming needs to be more expensive than cable for it to be a good business model for them.

Expect more consolidation and price increases.

 

[ButchPlz]

I signed up for the original YoutubeTV beta test, back in 2017 or whenever, when they were testing it in the NY metro and LA metro markets. And at that time, the price was 35 dollars a month and included about 30-35 channels (including ESPN and the SEC Network). Sweet merciful crap was I happy. 35 a month? And I got all the sports channels I'd wanted? Hot damn.

But more than that, Google had promised in their advertising that the price would never change. The VP in charge of YoutubeTV even bragged about how if you got in at the start, the price would remain the same. 35 a month in perpetuity? Hot friggity damn.

Then about a year into the program, they started blabbing about how they were raising the price to 45 because they added a bunch of garbage-ass networks no one would ever want to watch but it was suuuuuch a great deal. And, very regrettably of course, they would force everyone into the new pricing.

Then they came out again the next year and raised the price to 60, all while gaslighting people about how they should be excited by Google adding the "Discovery networks" - the channels that make all those dumbass fake reality shows and truly, truly sh**y programming - but oh wasn't that wonderful? Crappy junk channels, one after the other.

Now it's up to, what, 90? They never had any intention of making cable TV better, they just wanted to take over the market and insert themselves as the new middlemen.

Thankfully, I knew what was up and cancelled back when they raised it to 45. I was so damn livid. They PROMISED to never raise our prices, and then had the F'ing temerity to tell us to our faces about how we were getting a much better deal every time they raised the price. Assholes. I've never forgiven them for lying - or for continually coming back later and BSing everyone about how wonderful their newer pricing was. At least be honest and say "we want to make tons of money and to do that we have to rip you off, same as every other cable provider." At least own your BS.

Anyway, my point is, of course they're raising the prices again. They're jackasses who have no interest in empowering the consumers who purchase access to television.

I dropped it when they had major, major issues during the 2018 World Cup. First time in my wife's life her country made it, and YTTV kept *****ing the bed because they (despite raising prices) decided the world's biggest sporting event didn't require more infrastructure.

 

[joevol33]

I already canceled

 

[Godfatha]

Just canceled Sling TV because of increases. It used to be a good value (relatively speaking) but now it's just like everything else.

 

[VolinMichigan]

To the surprise of absolutely no one.

 

[vavolfan6]

These companies always do this s***. They are willing to take on a loss for a few years just to get investors excited from the total number of subscribers they get.

Then when everyone is on board, its price hike after price hike. I just choose not to buy any of them and find streams online. Consumers need to stop falling for this BS and letting these sports games be dispersed among an endless number of streaming apps. Its ridiculous.

 

[Dadof2Vols]

I avoid it all very carefully, but we do see advertisements for network shows when watching football. Generally I'm pretty horrified.

Found a graph on this but it's out of date.
View attachment 712436
Sling used to be my go-to for football and it's now $46. I guess it's still true that there's an add-on for the SEC network and maybe even ESPN2.


At such point that people offer to let you pay for ESPN and NOTHING ELSE it'll be interesting to see what that costs.

$100, $200 maybe $250 a month?

Here is an old article but it is spot on. I used to work in the industry and Clay hits the nail on the head in this article.

ESPN Lost 8 Million Subscribers in 2021, 10% of its overall subscriber base

Last year ESPN lost eight million cable and satellite subscribers, finishing 2021 with around 75 million total subscribers. That eight million subscriber loss, an average of nearly

www.outkick.com