News Google to launch YouTube Red subscription service

I've been using an ARM-based Chromebook for a few months and I've found that drops most of the ads; not all of them though. I'm not sure if that's intentional (to promote the sales of them) or if that's just a side effect of using ARM, but it's been pretty nice.

 

I assume we can expect them to ramp up the number of ads on the regular Youtube service, then?

 

Adblockpro serves me well enough at the moment, stripping out all add content. However, as Spreadie mentioned, are we in for more ads, maybe even a to and fro match between google and ad blockers - google finds a way around/disables adblockpro (some websites recognise you've got it and won't display the content 'til it's disabled), adblockpro or a.n.other finds a way around google's workaround and so it goes back n' forth...

 

As a current Play Music subscriber, I see no problems with this new service ;-)

 

Kinda make sense, but seems a bit steep to me.
While they might have some original/premium content, by the sound of it's hardly close to what Netflix/Amazon offer, and that is the price point they're competing at.

A few quid a month to drop the ads (without guilt) and little bit of premium content then I can see a decent amount of takers. Having it as another $10 (£8?) money drain on top of another more complete streaming service for what would amount to for many as just ditching ads, hmmm...

As above though, I guess it's a good thing if Google Play Music is you music service of choice.

 

I think do away with adds all together and have an extra charge from your ISP,

£5 extra per month, that gets divvied up between all content creators per month.

 

I have opted to spend the $10 on hard copies of all the music I listen to on youboobe instead.
Admittedly, I need to spend some on shelf expansion soon too...

I thought they were ramping the ads up. Now I know why.

 

So basically they offer as a "service" what AdBlock and 4K Video Downloader offer me for free.... plus some Originals that nobody knows anything about yet. Cool story, bro...

 

You missed the part where Google are again bullying/intimidating content creators: http://techcrunch.com/2015/10/21/an-offer-creators-cant-refuse/.

If you're a YouTube Partner - i.e. someone with a relatively high number of views/subscribers - then Google are forcing you to sign up to YouTube Red. Refuse to sign on and your videos will be hidden - no one will be able to watch them, whether they pay a subscription or not. Google have also refused to disclose the percentage of the subscription fees will be paid to content creators.

I like the idea of YouTube Red but unfortunately Google's implementation involves bludgeoning content creators into submission.

 

I must be missing something, why would YouTube give up the ad revenue from traditional partnered channels if they don't agree to also being part of the Red revenue model?

Is this saying that if you have YouTube Red, you'll only be able to see videos from channels that are also on Red?

...why? That seems like an awful deal instead of just letting Red users see all partnered videos without the ads. Who cares if you can't pay out that portion of revenue to the partners that didn't jump on board?

 

I'm still annoyed Google doesn't have a pay $10 and never see an adsense/doubleclick ad ever again option. I mean, it's not like they aren't tracking me, or my ad blocks across then net anyways...

 

This is just a guess as i don't fully understand why myself, but could it be to do with the differences between the contacts, on the free side they promise to pay a percentage of add revenue to content creators, the other contact says no adds but take a cut of subscriptions.

Problems arise when a YouTube Red subscriber watches non-Red creators content, the subscriber is expecting no adds while the content creator is expecting to be paid by YouTube for someone watching his/her content.

 

The problem with that is, as other streaming services show, it's perfectly possible for Youtube disable both those things if the will is there.
Up until now Youtube has basically allowed downloading and video ad-blocking for whatever reason. Now they are things that overlap with a paid service it wouldn't surprise me if that changes, at least for partnered channels.

Not that that is necessarily a bad thing, on the rule of thumb that ultimately someone-gotta-pay-for-all-this-****.

 

The thing is other services with a premium ad-free model simply don't serve ads to premium users and everything else goes on as normal. I feel like YouTube should be able to do that too, with the only difference with non-Red content providers then being that those partners miss out on revenue from Red users. Taking content away from both free and paid users just seems like an awful and arbitrary solution to me.

 

I'm still guessing so feel free to suggest other reasons.

Like i said i don't think its a problem from the viewers perspective, other than they couldn't offer red subscribers less content than what's available normally, it's a content creator problem.

As a content creator if i sign a contract that says every time someone watches my video i get half the advertising revenue, lets say that's 1p per view, if i get 1k views i would expect £100, using that example what would happen if half those viewers were Red subscribers?

Don't get me wrong I'm not standing up for YouTube or trying to make excuses for them, I'm just trying to work out the possible reason they're doing this as i can't find a decent explanation, maybe my Google-fu is letting me down.