2057
YouTube's plan backfires, people are installing better ad blockers (www.androidauthority.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
485 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemdro.id/post/2883134 (!android@lemdro.id)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 35 points 2 years ago (8 children)

I mean, I might have considered paying for YT premium if I thought it offered some value (other than disabling ads) but I won't sure as hell pay for anything that any company is trying to blackmail me into.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    I mean you didn't buy it before so why would you now? You don't need excuses. You just don't want to pay for it. Own it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    One could argue that we're paying for it without our consent, given the fact that Google doesn't pay anything in taxes. That's a cool four billion a year (at least) that they get from the American taxpayer for free.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago*

    One could argue that we're paying for it without our consent

    One could argue that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists. That doesn't make it remotely true.

    Google doesn't pay anything in taxes

    Uh. Google pays a shitload in taxes. There hasn't been a single year that they HAVEN'T paid taxes. They paid 11 billion in income taxes alone in 2022.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I use it because YouTube music is included and it's great while driving, it allows background play even with the screen off (I'm talking about mobile).

    There's something more, but nothing that a pro user cannot already do with third tools.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago*

    I find it funny how sometimes apps "create value" by taking something away which is included by default in similar products and goes without saying.

    In this context: YouTube is the only app I know which is denying to work when put into background or with the screen off.

    Or take some car manufacturers who start asking for a fee just to use basic functionality.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    But that's the wrong way around. They don't want you to pay, they make their money through advertising. They make far more money from advertiser's paying to put up ads than they ever make from people paying for premium.

    Same as with Facebook now bringing in an ad-free version (in the EU anyway) - they charge higher than is reasonable so that people will opt for the ad-supported free version instead.

    It's not that you are blackmailed into paying premium, it's that you're encouraged not to as a way of explicitly consenting to ads.

    Basically, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago

    lmao you're so wrong on ads being more profitable than premium, especially on a per-user basis

    According to this you can expect to make around $18/1000 views. That's with 55% going to the creator and 45% to Google. Which means that Google makes around $14.5 per 1000 views.

    Coincidentally, that's also rougly the price of YouTube Premium. Are you telling me that you watch a thousand videos per month?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent