Comment on YouTube Premium family plan price update ($17.99/month -> $32.99/month!)
cybersandwich@lemmy.world 8 months agoGoogle need to separate YouTube and Music.
I actually think they need to go the other way with it. Increase the value proposition by adding more features to it. Include more drive space, Google one, etc.
A lot of people are upset because they haven’t added any additional value to YouTube and are now just hiking the rents. If they threw in, more products and services to the bundle it’s a more compelling offering. I’d pay if it got me unlimited data on Google Fi, Google one with 200GB of storage, yt premium, I guess yt music? (I pay for prime music RN), and maybe some collab space/compute.
Yeah nah buddy.
I only have YouTube Premium/Red because it came free with Play Music, then they killed that and we all jumped to Spotify because it was/is so much better and kept our subscription just for ad-free YouTube.
If they seperate YouTube from YouTube Music, YouTube Music would die in seconds. The app sucks, having it linked to YouTube sucks, they know this.
It sounds like you are agreeing with me. The value proposition for any of these services individually is very low. But when combined it would be more worthwhile.
From a business perspective it would be a solid strategic move that would allow their services to differentiate themselves from competitors. Spotify can’t give you additional “Google drive” storage. It certainly doesn’t have any way to compete with YouTube. When you combine all of these capabilities and services you can make a product that warrants additional money each month
I don’t want cloud storage. I want ad-free YouTube. And the price is not fit for what they offer (they are a damn content hoster and not motherfucking Netflix).
Weird. I hated YouTube music (have it since my friend let me join his family plan) until I finally tried Spotify using xmanager. I realized ytm is miles ahead of Spotify and it’s made me rethink my hate for it
What do you like about Spotify besides your friends being on it?
I’ve gotten used to the queue function which lets you scroll through your entire now playing list. I was blown away seeing that Spotify only shows the upcoming songs (at least on mobile). I’m also liking the option to switch to a music video mid song. That’s super neat.
That said, even though I’ve never planned on paying for Spotify, I can totally see wanting options to pay for things separately
I’ve ditched Spotify a few times, purely for financial reasons since I’m already paying for YouTube Music, I always get frustrated and re-subscribe.
With Spotify I can switch between my car, my phone, my desktop, my loungeroom, my shed, anywhere I’m signed into Spotify, without having to start the song or playlist again. I’ve read YouTube Music working on this and it might be enough to get me to switch.
I don’t care who else uses Spotify.
YouTube Music doesn’t have a dedicated Android TV app, there’s no background playback on either of my media players and I don’t care for video clips.
You can also see all upcoming songs, and rearrange/remove them if desired, with Spotify. Maybe I’m not understanding your 3rd paragraph.
I don’t want none of those “features”, I just want to browse YouTube without ads. Right now I have to choose, pay more than 100€/year to get it without trouble, or install an adblocker and also not have ads, but with the slim chance that YouTube will implement an anti-adblocker that will last a few days. I’ll just install the adblocker.
If they just sold an “ad-free YouTube” instead of “premium YouTube” for half (or third) the price I might consider it, since I wouldn’t have to worry ever again. I won’t pay more than 100€/year just so I can get a single feature of a huge pack of features I don’t need or want.
Bloatware is not going to help the issue.
What you are describing is ruminating to Apple One. Music and Storage, Apple Arcade, AppleTV+, News and Fitness+. The thing is, Apple also charge these things separately too, but if you just want two of them, you can just select two of them. The bundle is priced in such a way that it is more cost effective to get them bundled. The cost of the smaller bundle (without News or Fitness+) is much cheaper than what Google is asking for YouTube Premium.
I would have no interest in Googles other services, I hardly trust them with my YouTube viewing habits. I’m not going to trust them to store my files, read my email, log my search history, even if I do pay them for the privilege.
whofearsthenight@lemm.ee 8 months ago
This is just the cable model. You want one channel (Youtube in this analogy) so you have to pay for the 200 channel package because that’s the only place it is even though you don’t want the other 199 channels.
If they threw in all of the things you said and still hiked the price, I’d still bail because not only do I not have any desire for those services, I actively want to avoid using many Google products as I can. The reality for me would be the same as including nothing and hiking the price, because I will still see no value from it.