Remember when it was $35/month? Dropped them like a bad habbit when it went to $60 something. No ala carte and adding channels I never wanted were also contributing factors.

Holy crap. I had no idea it was $73 a month. I'm a little shocked that is a viable price point.

Holy shiiii. I had no idea they got that brave to raise those costs to that level.

$73 A MONTH?

I still cannot understand how anyone decides to have 30% of their programming to be ads AND decide to pay for it.

So what is the next step for Google? Raising YT TV to $100/month? $200/month? Raising Youtube Premium to $30/month? Google one to $200/month? Laying off employees?

I mean they gotta keep hitting that 5% growth every year, right? When does it stop? When there's nobody else at the company? When people can't afford anything anymore and go bankrupt?

When are companies gonna understand that growth for the sake of growth every year is just not feasable?

You can stream pretty much anything for free here: https://fmoviesz.to/

Just make sure you have uBlock Origin installed.

If you have any issues, try searching 'free streaming sites reddit' and go from there.

Your wallets will thank me later.

The fuck? What's the point of it can't be cheaper.

I used YouTube TV early on when it was a legit alternative to cable. It costs just as much so there is no benefit. I cancelled when the prices were raised to 45 a month. They can fuck straight off at 73 a month

Relevant bits

YouTube TV launched in 2017 for $35 a month, but the base package is $72.99 after the latest price hike in March 2023. Google's "$600 less than cable" claim was challenged by Charter, which uses the brand name Spectrum and is the second-biggest cable company after Comcast. The National Advertising Division (NAD) previously ruled in Charter's favor but Google appealed the decision to the NARB in August.

"Charter contended the $600 figure was inaccurate, arguing that its Spectrum TV Select service in Los Angeles only cost around $219 a year more than Google's YouTube TV service," according to a MediaPost article in August.

A Google ad claimed that YouTube TV provided $600 in "annual average savings" compared to cable as of January 2023. A disclosure on the ad said the price was for "new users only" and that the $600 annual savings was "based on a study by SmithGeiger of the published cost of comparable standalone cable in the top 50 Nielsen DMAs, including all fees, taxes, promotion pricing, DVR box rental and service fees, and a 2nd cable box."

Next advertising campaign: Cable companies sued to keep us from telling you how much money you'd save by switching to YouTube TV. Find out the numbers for yourself at calculate your savings link

I feel sorry for those that don't use newsgroups and automation.

Not just YouTube TV. I was thinking about switching from the Spotify family plan to the YouTube family plan, but the Spotify family plan is $16.99/mo and the YouTube family plan is $22.99/mo. That does include YouTube with no ads, but it's still too expensive for me. It's just not worth an additional $6. Especially not while my adblocker still works. It does mean I can't cast ad-free YouTube to my Chromecast because Google would not allow that, but I can live with it.

I had no idea YouTube TV costs that much, or that there were people paying that much.

I don't get it I thought I pay like $5 a month for my 1/6 portion of YouTube premium family account which included YouTube TV (which i never use)

Lol. My retired parents just switched to this because cable was too expensive.

OTA antenna + Plex is the best combination for me. Any content with no subscription fees.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Google has agreed to stop advertising YouTube TV as "$600 less than cable" after losing an appeal of a previous ruling that went against the company.

The National Advertising Review Board (NARB) announced today that it rejected Google's appeal and recommended that the company discontinue the YouTube TV claim.

The National Advertising Division (NAD) previously ruled in Charter's favor but Google appealed the decision to the NARB in August.

A disclosure on the ad said the price was for "new users only" and that the $600 annual savings was "based on a study by SmithGeiger of the published cost of comparable standalone cable in the top 50 Nielsen DMAs, including all fees, taxes, promotion pricing, DVR box rental and service fees, and a 2nd cable box."

Agreeing with the NAD decision, an NARB panel found that the price comparison provided by Google did not justify the "$600 less" claim.

Google said it "disagrees with NARB's determination that people watching the challenged commercials will somehow understand 'cable' to mean something other than traditional cable television," but "intends to modify or cease the disputed advertising claim."

The original article contains 443 words, the summary contains 184 words. Saved 58%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!