I’d pay for it if they didn’t overcharge so much. Their content is provided to them for free, but they charge more than Netflix to distribute it. Fuck that.
timewarp@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Am I the only one that pays for YouTube Premium? I get not wanting to pay for things. I don’t feel bad for Google here, but I also don’t understand what people expect. The government happily subsidizes Musk to litter outerspace. Maybe the government should be subsidizing YouTube?
reddig33@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Kolrami@lemmy.world 2 months ago
YouTube ad tier: $0 Netflix ad tier: $6.99 YouTube premium: $13.99 Netflix standard: $15.49
They don’t charge more than Netflix, but most of their content is definitely provided to them for free. On top of that, most of YouTube’s original content is behind their premium subscription paywall. I tried to see how many of their originals shows are actually viewable with their ad tier and it’s hard to pin down a number. My speculation is it doesn’t matter because either so few people are willing to pay for premium or their originals aren’t very marketable. Off the top of my head I’d heard of exactly one YouTube original.
Maybe
reddig33@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Netflix lowest ad-free price was $9.99 until three days ago.
Kolrami@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I should’ve specified I was citing Netflix’s current US pricing help.netflix.com/en/node/24926 and YouTube’s current US pricing www.youtube.com/premium.
Kolrami@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Oh thanks I was looking at old information.
ripcord@lemmy.world 2 months ago
But in theory they’re paying for that content out of Premium subscriptions.
Probably not enough, but that’s supposed to be part of what it’s for.
kitnaht@lemmy.world 2 months ago
You might want to watch this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Q3ZXQZZlcE
lawrence@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Did you mean this? yewtu.be/watch?v=4Q3ZXQZZlcE
MrVilliam@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I’m okay with seeing an acceptable level of advertisement. Content creators have ad reads within their videos which are skippable, and they’ve resorted to that because YouTube doesn’t pay very well. It used to be that you’d get a short ad at the start of every video or two, and maybe another short ad per 7 minutes or so. Now, it’s pretty common for every video to have at least 20 seconds of ad before starting and another 10-30 seconds of ad every 3-5 minutes or so. I like watching on my PS5 while doing chores, so I’m subject to all of these ads. I actually have fully abandoned videos halfway in because of ads that were 60 seconds before I would have the option to “skip” the ad.
I pay for enough things in my life that I was okay with the trade-off of the ads on YouTube. Now, it’s (no joke) about 5 minutes of ads interrupting a 20 minute video, and there’s usually a 2 minute ad read within that 20 minute video, so really 7 minutes of ads per 18 minutes of content. But it’s not really 18 minutes of content because there’s an intro, an outro, and a “remember to like, comment, subscribe, and smash that bell” bullshit too. It’s roughly 2:1 ratio of actual content to ads and fluff. I’m not fucking paying to take it from 2:1 to 3:1 and they can eat my entire asshole for even suggesting such a thing. Maybe instead of trying to hold eyeballs ransom with the choice of either subscription payments or and overabundance of ads, they should charge for uploading videos to their servers. Sound like a terrible idea? Then I’m sure they’ll do it within 5 years. Because fuck everybody, that’s why.
Fuzzy_Red_Panda@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Yep. Google treats their service like television, but it’s not television. We all watch the videos on computers and computers are owned by users and each user gets to decide what their computer does, full stop.
The ad model for youtube will always be circumvented by the fact that our computers can run whatever code we want it to (despite Microsoft’s and Apple’s efforts). If that means that youtube goes subscription only, so be it. If that means youtube can’t sustain itself as a business with ad revenue, then so be it. It would mean that decentralized alternatives gain popularity and it would most likely be to the benefit of everyone who isn’t a corporation.
Youtube has a stranglehold on creativity, open speech, and fair use. Youtube will demonetize a video for saying too many swear words. They’ll demonetize or restrict a video for talking about non-sexual lgbt content. They’ll take down legal and legitimate videos for copyright infringement even though it’s fair use.
Youtube is bad for creators and it’s bad for users.
Honytawk@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
I’d pay for it with money, but I am already paying with my data you see.
sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
Use newpipe or freetube and just send the creators you watch most that money. Google can go fuck themselves
mle86@feddit.org 2 months ago
I want to pay for the content on youtube and I believe that the creators deserve it as well as I understand that the platform costs money. But the UX is so bad and youtube very obviously does not care at all about their viewers, that I morally just can’t justify giving them money for that level of service.