Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google Youtube

Google Raising Price of YouTube Premium To $14 Per Month (9to5google.com) 88

Posted by msmash from the everything-expensive-all-at-once dept.
The price of an individual YouTube Premium subscription is increasing by $2 to $13.99 per month in the US for new and current customers. From a report: This price increase is live for new subscribers as seen on youtube.com/premium. Instead of $11.99, YouTube Premium now costs $13.99/month. Meanwhile, it's $18.99 if you're subscribing from the iOS YouTube app. Toward the end of last year, family Premium plans saw a big hike to $22.99/month. That remains the same today. The annual subscription, which was introduced in January of 2022, goes to $139.99 in a $20 increase. Compared to paying monthly, you save $27.89.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Raising Price of YouTube Premium To $14 Per Month More

Google Raising Price of YouTube Premium To $14 Per Month

Comments Filter:

  • $15 Billion a Year (Score:5, Insightful)

    by muh_freeze_peach ( 9622152 ) on Thursday July 20, 2023 @02:03PM (#63702320)
    Youtube makes tens of billions a year on ads alone. Increasing the price to remove those ads is greed manifest.

    • Re:$15 Billion a Year (Score:5, Funny)

      by Major_Disorder ( 5019363 ) on Thursday July 20, 2023 @02:13PM (#63702340)
      This is Google. When they changed their motto from "Don't be evil", I believe the new motto was, "greed manifest"

      • Re:$15 Billion a Year (Score:5, Insightful)

        by larryjoe ( 135075 ) on Thursday July 20, 2023 @03:11PM (#63702506)

        This is Google. When they changed their motto from "Don't be evil", I believe the new motto was, "greed manifest"

        In a sense, Google never really practically changed their motto. It's just that the definition of evil is in the eye of the beholder. So, in Google's eyes, they've never been evil and currently are not.

        Has there been a single "evil person" (e.g., insert your favorite mass murderer) who thought, "I'm doing what I'm doing because I love being evil." Yes, there are evil geniuses in movies that think this way, but does this ever happen in reality? In reality, "evil" people have their own rationalizations for why their actions were not only not evil but actually good and necessary.

        In other words, the motto was worthless to begin with.

    • Re:$15 Billion a Year (Score:4, Insightful)

      by rogoshen1 ( 2922505 ) on Thursday July 20, 2023 @02:14PM (#63702344)

      weird, and yet adblock is free.
      oh well, sorry google.

      • For now. Soon, they will be changing it so you have to at least download the ad even if you don't display it.

        • oh well, then I guess I won't be watching youtube anymore.

          That said, I think google is sorely misjudging the lengths people will go to avoid being mindfucked by advertising.
          oh wait, who am i kidding. the majority of people will bitch and moan about it, but eventually just bend over and take it.

          • oh well, then I guess I won't be watching youtube anymore.

            That said, I think google is sorely misjudging the lengths people will go to avoid being mindfucked by advertising.
            oh wait, who am i kidding. the majority of people will bitch and moan about it, but eventually just bend over and take it.

            I think the majority of people don't know about ad blocking. I just recently introduced my wife to ad blocking. She was amazed and will be using ad blocking for all her devices now. I think Google is hoping that the majority of users either don't know about ad blocking, don't know how to install an ad blocker, are too lazy, or are misled by the fake ad blocking in Chrome.

            • Adblock on mobile is still a pain. I haven't found a good one for android (but haven't looked in a long time either).

            • I think the majority of people don't know about ad blocking. I just recently introduced my wife to ad blocking. She was amazed and will be using ad blocking for all her devices now. I think Google is hoping that the majority of users either don't know about ad blocking, don't know how to install an ad blocker, are too lazy, or are misled by the fake ad blocking in Chrome.

              True. Never underestimate the tehnological illiteracy of the people. It's beyond measure. To the point that I wonder if they are surfing the same Web as we do...

              • Never underestimate the technological illiteracy of the people. It's beyond measure.

                And they are proud to not understand the machine with the blinking lights.

          • An election year is approaching, no price is too high so I don't have to see the unending political ads that happen during a major election cycle...

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by EvilSS ( 557649 )
        Yea, they are working on that as well: https://9to5google.com/2023/06... [9to5google.com]

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by PPH ( 736903 )

          Oh noes! I guess they've never heard of people clearing their cookies and cache.

          Allow YouTube Ads

          How? I click the button and follow the instructions but it's still the same. I guess I'm just not going to download that DRM-encumbered codec that your ads require*.

          *Really? You people protect the ad videos with DRM but I can still scrape the video content that I was after and play it with no problems.

        • A spokesperson explains that ad blockers have never been allowed on the platform, and that disabling playback like this is taken “very seriously” and only appears if a user ignores multiple requests to turn ads on.

          What platform, my own device that makes GET requests? What a brazen way of wording it. Am I allowed to look away from ads on your platform? Sneeze with my eyes closed?

          • Exactly. People who lie that "adblockers are unethical / stealing" are complete fucking idiots. Closing my eyes, muting the volume, etc. IS ethical.

            If I am going to the kitchen / bathroom during an ad then that is MY business, not yours. MY electricity, my device, my choice to watch, or not, your shitty ad.

            • Closing my eyes, muting the volume, etc. IS ethical.

              I remember when a Turner exec explicitly stated otherwise: https://news.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]

              It wouldn't surprise me if some TV/streaming executives believe there's an implicit contract between viewers and content providers that makes you morally responsible for watching and paying attention to the commercials.

          • You can control your network but they can control theirs as well. They are under no obligation to send you traffic you request.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by irving47 ( 73147 )

        They've already started experimenting with rollout of an adblocker blocker. It'll give you 3 chances to remove it/whitelist ads and then start blocking you.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by taustin ( 171655 )

      If you translate "Google" into English, it means "greed."

      • If you translate "Google" into English, it means "greed."

        I would hope that most people on a site like this know what googol is and where they got the name.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dryeo ( 100693 )

        It is now a public company, shareholders are the only ones that matter, like with most public companies.

    • Really? Opting out of their biggest revenue stream seems like it would obviously cost a bit of money.

      I'm fine with the increase. Out of all the the video services I pay for Youtube Premium would probably be the last one I'd drop.

      • Re:$15 Billion a Year (Score:4, Interesting)

        by dgatwood ( 11270 ) on Thursday July 20, 2023 @02:53PM (#63702462) Homepage Journal

        I’m the opposite. It would me worth maybe $3 a month for me. I would bite my lip and pay it at $5. I just laughed at the price before, and I’m embarrassed to think that they are cranking it up further, because it isn’t worth much to me at all to not have to mute the ads and skip them for a few views per month.

        The thing is, I know there are probably a thousand people like me for every one like you, because most people are occasional watchers. If YouTube really wants to maximize profits, they should offer an ad-free for X hours or X views or something, as an option for the myriad folks who rarely watch but are getting more and more annoyed by the level of ads and thus are watching less and less.

    • YouTube is the only streaming service worth paying for honestly. I don't feel I get as much out of Netflix or Disney+ or primevideo as I do from YouTube.

      • YouTube is the only streaming service worth paying for honestly. I don't feel I get as much out of Netflix or Disney+ or primevideo as I do from YouTube.

        I'm of the opposite opinion... I like the fact that the stuff I watch (albeit not often) on Netflix, Prime Video and Disney+ is almost always made to a good standard of production and writing whereas the stuff I see on YouTube is, more often than not, mindless drivel (and I'm only talking about the stuff *I* upload, other people's videos are even worse than that).

        Louis Rossman also makes a great point that subscribing to YouTube Premium produces a worse product than simply downloading stuff and watching it

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          What is your YouTube channel?

          Personally I find there is lots of high quality content on YouTube, that you genuinely can't get anywhere else. Lots of retro computing stuff, philosophy discussion, eSports (edited down rather than long form streaming), travel videos that aren't commercial bullshit, sumo, and some great "slow TV" channels. Some good tool review and DIY channels too.

          There is a lot of crap, but if you put the effort in to find good stuff it is there.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by c-A-d ( 77980 )

        If the front page content is any indication of the value of YouTube's content, then I really should be getting paid to watch it.

        • It is not. That's just what the masses are watching/what the algorithm is pushing. There's all kinds of interesting stuff, here's a smattering of makers, documentary producers, and other educators:

          Honest Ads, Deep Look, Breaking Taps, Trekspertise, Mustard, Mathologer,
          Glove and Boots, VWestlife, History Matters, CGP Grey, Integza, engineerguy,
          Applied Procrastination, Project Farm, Peter Brown, PBS Idea Channel,
          LastWeekTonight, Matthias random stuff, suckerpinch, Techmoan, This Old Tony,
          SmarterEveryDay, Sam

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ranton ( 36917 )

      Youtube makes tens of billions a year on ads alone. Increasing the price to remove those ads is greed manifest.

      I don't understand the connection you are making between the revenue they make on ads and the money they make on YouTube Premium. Revenue from YouTube Premium is meant to compensate for lost ad revenue because those users are not viewing ads anymore. If YouTube is increasing the price of YouTube Premium, that is likely because they are also making more money from ad revenue. This would increase the value of YouTube Premium, and therefore the price. You seem to imply increasing YouTube ad revenue would reduc

      • If YouTube is increasing the price of YouTube Premium, that is likely because they are also making more money from ad revenue.

        Or they are losing money from ad revenue and want to make that up. I find that more likely.

      • "Let me rationalize this so it doesn't seem greedy as fuck"

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kwandar ( 733439 )
      I'm puzzled that Netflix isn't taking advantage of the relatively inexpensive original content of Youtube creators and offering a competitive product?

      • Creators have a disincentive to post their videos to other platforms. Google can pay them more, and the more views they get on Youtube, the more the algorithm promotes their content.

        • Those on Nebula make more there than on YouTube. Wendover Productions put a video out about this a few weeks ago.

    • Greed manifest would be to charge subscription fees and still force people to watch ads anyway. I don't exactly keep up with this stuff, but I don't believe YouTube has gone that far yet.

      Still, I have no interest in paying YouTube since I'd still have to deal with all the sponsor/Patreon bullshit the content creators put in their own videos. Many of these sponsor deals are in the order of 2 minutes long and intertwined within the content. I don't watch much YouTube anymore.

      • Have you not heard of sponsorblock. I use it and its fantastic at cutting the crap out. Don't forget to go into the options on sponsorblock and add merch blocking as an option too because no, i don't want an overpriced water bottle.
  • Raising the cost to users at a time when the value to users is at an all time low is a bad sign. No matter how much I pay, I'm still stuck dealing with a platform that will inundate me with product-positive marketing scams over interesting content made by thoughtful nerds.

    YouTube let Raid Shadow Legends and Monster Energy shape the content on their platform for so long that it just doesn't work for me as a user who wants to watch adults have meaningful conversations about things they care about.
  • It wasn't worth the $12 a month. Making it more expensive is not going to get me to sign up.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by ranton ( 36917 )

      It wasn't worth the $12 a month. Making it more expensive is not going to get me to sign up.

      Depends on how much your time is worth to you. If you are an average YouTube mobile user, you are watching 24 hours of YouTube videos per month. If you don't have YouTube premium or an ad blocker, you are watching about 30 minutes of ads. So the question is, would you watch an hour of ads if someone paid you $28 to do it? I wouldn't. I sure would have done it when I was 20 though.

      I on the other hand watch about 60 hours of YouTube per month. So I am saving closer to 75 minutes of ad viewing per month. So fo

      • So the question is, would you watch an hour of ads if someone paid you $28 to do it?

        Fuck no.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dryeo ( 100693 )

        Easier to just use Firefox and UBlock Origin.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by godrik ( 1287354 )

        Well, and that's ignoring the familly plan.
        My son got a youtube paid account because he has youtube on about all day long.The family account is only $23 per month for 5 accounts. So really it's pretty cheap per account.
        I would not pay $14 just for myself, but $23 for me, my wife, my son, and my mother in law, that's not a bad deal...

  • If you live in a decent-sized US city, you'll have at least a handful of non-junk free over-the-air (sub)channels to choose from.

    Plus 10x as many junk ones.

    • I get a kick out of the "junk" channels, especially late night. They're always playing some unknown movie at the wrong aspect ratio or some forgotten 80s sitcom. I find that a lot more interesting than the main channels.

    • I lived in condos and apartment my whole life until last year. Unfortunately, my window exposure always seems to be diametrically opposite from where it needed to be for the antennas to pick up a signal. It was never stable.

      https://www.overtheairdigitalt... [overtheairdigitaltv.com]

      So, if you have a home where the windows are facing broadcasting towers, or you have a house and can run up an actual outdoor antenna, over the air might work well for you. When I did manage to lock the signal properly, the picture was great.

  • We need a "Google Premium" instead. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by xack ( 5304745 ) on Thursday July 20, 2023 @02:25PM (#63702380)
    Basically a paid ad blocker that shares the revenue with the whole internet. Google has enough market share with Chrome and it's Ad networks to make it happen, I would pay $25/50 a month on top of my existing isp for a legitimate ad free internet (instead of having to "pirate it" with ublock origin). But they make much more many annoying people with ads than to clean up the internet. But just for Youtube and other individual sites, it's not worth it. (Yes, I know about Brave, but they sold out to cryptocurrency scammers years ago).

    • If you pay to not see ads, you'll end up paying and seeing ads. Remember cable? Yeah, like that. And like Netflix. Do not offer your money to one of the richest companies in the world, you idiot.

      • This. Basically, don't be a sucker and fall for it again. Young people have an excuse due to lack of being-fooled experience.
      • So. Cancel when they do start showing ads on premium subs. I fully intend to.
        • Right, exactly like cable or satellite. I remember when I last checked, they seriously expected me to pay over $100/mo to watch cable TV, which I knew there was only like one or two channels and maybe one show per channel I would actually want to watch occasionally. Cable reached a point where it wasn't worth paying for.
          I feel like youtube reached the point that it was worth paying for immediately upon launching. It's like suggesting I pay for Tiktok or Facebook.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ranton ( 36917 )

      Google has about 8 billion unique monthly visitors, and makes about $13.5 billion in search ad revenue per month. So Google makes about $1.69 per unique monthly visitor. Or if you look at their 100 billion searches per month, that comes out to 7.5 searches per dollar of revenue.

      I make about 4000 Google searches per month, which is well above average. Google apparently makes about $500 per month on me alone. So it sounds like paying $25/50 per month to remove ads would be a great deal for me.

      But I'm not sure

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dryeo ( 100693 )

        Considering the population of the Earth is about 8 billion, 49 million according to https://www.worldometers.info/... [worldometers.info] I have a hard time believing that that many actual humans visit a month, and I assume bots don't help their income.

    • Basically a paid ad blocker that shares the revenue with the whole internet. Google has enough market share with Chrome and it's Ad networks to make it happen

      They really don't, unless you're suggesting they block other networks ads for you.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      I like that idea. Pay a fixed amount every month, and have it distributed to sites that participate in the scheme in exchange for no ads or tracking. It would have to be done anonymously so that sites can't tie my visits to an identity.

      I'd still run uBlock but at least sites that did the right thing would get paid.

  • And I continue to still not care about youtube's premium services. People complain about Netflix, but there's tons more value there than on YouTube, and I get Netflix for free through T-Mobile.

  • Come on, guys. I dropped Netflix because they were now more expensive than Disney+. And you think YouTube, of all things, is worth more than either of them?

    Your stupid ads are fucking annoying and completely off-topic 99.999% of the time. Get better and you'll get more profits.

  • Hmmm... I think there's a little more room. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Petersko ( 564140 ) on Thursday July 20, 2023 @02:43PM (#63702430)

    I don't subscribe currently, and will continue this trend at $14. I think I could be convinced to continue not subscribing, even up to $19.99.

  • The day will come when Youtube becomes untenable, and then you want your videos ready to be served somewhere else, not locked into a hostile leech on your creativity.

  • You really want to make the service worth money? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ip_vjl ( 410654 ) on Thursday July 20, 2023 @02:49PM (#63702454) Homepage

    Then, allow me to automatically block any video where the thumbnail is someone making the standard "shocked face", allow me to never ever ever ever have to see YouTube Shorts appear in the results, and make it so that if I search using the "intitle:" modifier that you don't actually return results where the search term isn't, you know, ACTUALLY IN THE TITLE ... then I might consider it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by irving47 ( 73147 )

      I fuckign hate shorts, too. Desktop browser? There's a plugin to return the controls/interface back to standard. (can't look ATM) doesn't help with the portrait format/aspect ratio of course, but it makes them tolerable if you're viewing your subscriptions page and they come up because your favorite creator is still falling for their crap...

    • What, you want Google to give you results that actually match your search criteria? They used to do that, but less and less in the past few years. They show you what they want you to see. Even Bing - awful as it is - is now better than Google.

  • I think what youtube/google... and really everyone faces is that people are getting subscription fatigue and now every service is simultaneously reducing the amount of content and increasing the price. They're also reducing the rev share with content creators. It's a cash grab.

    What's strange is that normal capitalistic methods are being ignored. Increasing prices to compensate for a stagnant user base almost always means losing users. Youtube is still growing, but the trend lines are leveling off and it

  • That people pay for YouTube. It's full of videos with mouths gaped wide open and red arrows and circles everywhere.

    • There's a ton of garbage on Youtube, but some good content as well. You have to seek out specific channels matching your interests rather than just relying on the algorithms (which will push the open mouth arrows and circles videos). For example, I'm into cars and find Youtube to be the best place for car reviews and car builds. Regular TV shows that do car builds are all dumbed down nonsense, but there are quite a few youtubers that do really high quality stuff and are great for nerding out over the techni

  • Ads, ads and more ads. Hiding honest votes. And then upping the express lane toll that encourages monetizing misery of those who don't eagerly give Goog more money. No, I'll do something else other than watch YT.

Slashdot Top Deals

The biggest difference between time and space is that you can't reuse time. -- Merrick Furst

Close