PJ87
Journeyman Pro
Life really isn't that simple.
YouTube rant.
- Thread starter spongebob59
- Start date
Life really isn't that simple.
Don’t you know the best way to help people keep their jobs is to cause that company more financial issues.
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
There's financial issues, and then fincancial issues because the profits you're making aren't enough to keep shareholders happy....Don’t you know the best way to help people keep their jobs is to cause that company more financial issues.
There was retail long before Amazon you know..
As horrible as it, companies have a legal obligation to maximise profits for their shareholders. If profits start to drop, they legally must act to restore profits.
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
Its a shame then that a $9.9 billion profit up to September '23 (up $2.9 billion on the previous year) isn't enough then...
Jimaroid
Journeyman Pro
Twitch has never been profitable. Amazon have kept it going far longer than it should have in reality.
Jimaroid
Journeyman Pro
Ugh. Turns out they’ve completely axed premium lite at the end of 2023. Overall the pricing has changed though so I’ve resubscribed.
garyinderry
Ryder Cup Winner
Download smart tube. Ads be gone.
cliveb
Head Pro
A legal obligation. Really?
IANAL, but suspect that's not true.
Which law is broken if a company fails to make enough profit?
D
Deleted member 35599
Guest
I have used Opera browser for years with the built in ad blocker. However, there is a constant battle between Youtube and the ad blockers. One side implements a new way to beat the other, then the other plays catch up and out smarts the other. Over the years I have periods with no ads, then they come back, then I get a browser update and then the ads go away again.
However, Youtube are going to significant lengths to prevent ad blockers working and the situation with the ads has got much worse lately, more frequent and more intrusive. It is like youtube wants to cheese off all their users so that we all clear off to Rumble. com and start watching our content on there.
I also use a VPN with ad blocking as well as the browser based ad blocker I mentioned. No more ads.
However, Youtube are going to significant lengths to prevent ad blockers working and the situation with the ads has got much worse lately, more frequent and more intrusive. It is like youtube wants to cheese off all their users so that we all clear off to Rumble. com and start watching our content on there.
I also use a VPN with ad blocking as well as the browser based ad blocker I mentioned. No more ads.
Slime
Tour Winner
I use Firefox with AdBlocker Ultimate and never have any YouTube adverts ........................ ever.
cliveb
Head Pro
I get the impression that Google are constantly fiddling about with YouTube's response to ad blockers.
I use Firefox with two blockers installed (AdBlockPlus and AdGuard). Over the past few weeks I've seen various warnings popping up on YouTube about the blockers. I've even seen messages saying that I only have 3 more videos before access will be denied. I tried using Chrome instead of Firefox but it made no difference. For the last few days I've had no issues and seen no ads. But one thing is for sure: YouTube is very slow response-wise. I suspect slowing things down when ad blockers are detected is the current strategy. No doubt it will change again sooner or later.
If they were sensible and made the monthly fee nominal (say a couple of quid) I would probably be happy to pay it. But I'm not giving them £10 a month. And I suspect the same goes for many. If they reduced the fee significantly, I bet they'd end up with more revenue.
I use Firefox with two blockers installed (AdBlockPlus and AdGuard). Over the past few weeks I've seen various warnings popping up on YouTube about the blockers. I've even seen messages saying that I only have 3 more videos before access will be denied. I tried using Chrome instead of Firefox but it made no difference. For the last few days I've had no issues and seen no ads. But one thing is for sure: YouTube is very slow response-wise. I suspect slowing things down when ad blockers are detected is the current strategy. No doubt it will change again sooner or later.
If they were sensible and made the monthly fee nominal (say a couple of quid) I would probably be happy to pay it. But I'm not giving them £10 a month. And I suspect the same goes for many. If they reduced the fee significantly, I bet they'd end up with more revenue.
PJ87
Journeyman Pro
It's the same with sky sports, Amazon fire sticks wouldn't be a thing if sky sports was a reasonable amount a month.
I have BT sport, hell if west ham dont get Europa football I reckon I'll can that off it's been the only saving grace of the thing for 3 years
ColchesterFC
Journeyman Pro
Exactly this. I used to pay £30 or £40 per month for Sky Sports and I was able to watch Premier League football, Champions/Europa league football, England cricket test matches, rugby (league and union), golf (PGA, European tour, Ryder cup) and many other sporting events. Now I need multiple different subscriptions to multiple different companies at a vastly increased rate to watch the same. But apparently "competition" and removing the monopoly have made things better for me.
4LEX
Well-known member
It might be an unpopular opinion but I find YouTube add free a bargain.
I use Now TV to watch all my sports and have Sky Sports, Sky Movies, TNT Sports and Viaplay plus Netflix and Discovery+ for around £75 a month. That includes Amazon Prime which has a load of stuff too. The key is going to cancel your subscription and you'll get a good offer. This is for Sky stuff mainly as the others don't seem to budge. I've been getting Sky Sports for around £15 a month for years which is excellent when a daily Sky Sports pass on Now TV is £11.99.
I use Now TV to watch all my sports and have Sky Sports, Sky Movies, TNT Sports and Viaplay plus Netflix and Discovery+ for around £75 a month. That includes Amazon Prime which has a load of stuff too. The key is going to cancel your subscription and you'll get a good offer. This is for Sky stuff mainly as the others don't seem to budge. I've been getting Sky Sports for around £15 a month for years which is excellent when a daily Sky Sports pass on Now TV is £11.99.
chico
Club Champion
If you go back far enough there was competition without subscription. BBC, ITV, Channel 4. ITV almost won the first bid for screening the EPL, if they had Sky would have folded. Alan Sugar who was involved in making Sky boxes had some involvement in tipping sky off to increase their offer.(allegedly)
Some people mourn the loss of Sky's monopoly but they're the reason we are where we are.
