Rumor: YouTube to Stream TV channels though paid subscription
Click here to post a comment for Rumor: YouTube to Stream TV channels though paid subscription on our message forum
EspHack
"live" like nasa TV's 24h long video loop?
Cyberdyne
Interesting, but largely silly. Without Cable heavy hitters like the Walking Dead or Game of Thrones, most people who cut the TV cord like me will not care at all.
And when you consider that people people would much prefer to stream those shows on something like Netflix it seems even more pointless.
And it seems even more-more pointless when you consider that YouTube gets it's very name from the fact that it's content is largely user generated.
Actually it's not just silly and pointless, it's just stupid.
Irenicus
Hahaha no thanks
I'll just do what smart people do and continue to torrent TV shows. I don't watch ads, and never watch antenna TV
Irenicus
Actually, there is a live nasa channel that's not just a loop
kinggavin
the problem you tube has is the companys are probably getting fed up keep paying google millions for ads but google needs money to pay people like pewdiepie 7 million a year for his crap videos which 5 years olds watch who dont even have credit cards so there gonna buy loads of products lols , but its gotta stay free because if they make it subscription it lose millions of the kids views who watch it , lets face it the only reason youtube get so many views its coz its free
Prince Valiant
I'll stick to buying DVD or BD releases of TV shows. I'd consider TV again if I could get individual channels for cheap and drop or add them whenever but, I know that won't happen 😛.
schmidtbag
Kind of flawed logic there - you could argue the same about TV channels focused on kids...
I think ad companies are more annoyed about paying more per-view because users have the ability to block ads on youtube, but they can't on TV. For those who don't block the ads, most ads can be skipped.
chispy
No thank you.
Thanks but no thanks youtube. I'm all set already with paid subscription only to Netflix for $8.99 a month 2 devices, free hulu.com and free crackle TV + i have an old antenna so that i can watch my local channels here free 28 of them and that's more than enough for me 🙂. youtube can keep their pay to watch service :thumbup:
kinggavin
you missed the point , the point is tv you have to pay a licence fee and if u want sky tv you have pay subscription and also tv has proper shows you cant compare the quality of tv shows to you tube the difference is huge , to put in simple terms youtube is only big because its free to watch it as i said and if they put youtube behind a paywall how many people will pay to view youtube? , my guess is youtube would lose millions of views if it was behind a paywall and would not be very popular
schmidtbag
No, you don't. If your TV supports an antenna and you don't live in the middle of nowhere, you can get free content.
And that's what Youtube is trying to do... so why is it so bad when they do it?
Actually, you can compare the quality. If it were so bad, it's popularity would be stagnant, but instead it's going up. It's threatening to some TV studios. Also, many TV shows are putting their content on YT. Some videos on YT get more views within their release day than many TV shows. Quality is not the issue, nor is it a requirement to get viewers.
Ever heard of Youtube Red or Patreon? Youtube viewers aren't forced to pay, but people still do. People still make good money on YT.
BTW, use some punctuation other than commas.
ScoobyDooby
The only real reason I have my cable still is for sports.. Most shows I can just download, so really I'm paying $75 a month just for that 🙁
I'd love to cut the cable.. but dunno if I will just yet. However, if youtube has a decent selection of channels, I could see people spending for a subscription, especially if its competitive enough to be better than cable.
schmidtbag
If you get reception over air, many of those channels show live sports, and remember, it's free. You can also go to websites of whatever channel is hosting the sports and watch live streams there (also free).
ScoobyDooby
Yeah I've tried to stream some games online, but the quality tends to be shifty.
As for over the air channels, that is an intriguing idea. I am not really knowledgeable with that.. I wonder if I could get hd quality over here on the west coast using an antenna :|
schmidtbag
Pretty easy to do. Basically just find some rabbit ears, plug it into your coax jack, and tell your TV to scan via antenna. There are newer powered antennas designed for modern ATSC tuners, so if you get some reception but it's glitchy, you might want to look into those. Where I live, I can get about 30 channels over the air, a handful of them are 1080i. About 10 are pretty much useless [for me], because they're either other languages or "Shop-at-Home".
ScoobyDooby
I see. cool, thanks for the heads up 🙂
Embra
I stream on Sling TV. I am quite happy with it. A few channels seem to stream better than others at times, but generally works very well. 1080p TV.
ScoobyDooby
^ You Americans get all the perks 🙂
Reddoguk
Sky takes the pish so any competition is health for consumers like me who foolishly pays Big Rupert 120 pound a month for a multi-room HD service that is basically just repeats after repeats, on top of all that i must still pay the Beeb money every year just for having the privilege of being able to watch bbc channels, even if you don't watch bbc channels.
I'm so privileged that even owning a tv or radio means you have to pay them.(even if you prove it's not plugged in or used, you own it you pay it)
More paid subscription services hopefully means competitive pricing.
Sky is very much like BT used to be, a monopoly. The sooner we get a variety to pick from surely the better.
Who knows? we may even see a YTBox being released some time in the future.
