# YouTube TV Add-Ons Without the Base $65 Plan



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

*YouTube TV Lets You Subscribe to Select Add-Ons Without the Base $65 Plan*


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

What would be the point of subscribing through YouTube if it isn't going to be integrated into your live TV guide?


----------



## rnbmusicfan (Jul 19, 2005)

harsh said:


> What would be the point of subscribing through YouTube if it isn't going to be integrated into your live TV guide?


It targets customers that don't care for basic cable channels, but want premium services, like Showtime and Starz.

Although I'm not sure how many linear channels of premiums you get with YouTube, but Hulu and Sling have quite a few. 

The downside is one never gets the best deals, as compared to purchasing directly from Starz or Showtime. For right now, if I order Showtime directly through Showtime and pay with my American Express after I added the deal to my card, I get $7 back for 3 months. So, I pay Showtime $10, and get back $7 from Amex.

Starz has a deal - pay $20 and get Starz for 6 months, directly through Starz. Downside is lack of linear channels and everything is on demand.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

rnbmusicfan said:


> It targets customers that don't care for basic cable channels, but want premium services, like Showtime and Starz.


Anyone can subscribe to those suites directly without going through YouTube. In fact, you can often get some manner of discount on the more expensive suites (may require buying a year at a time) if you go direct.


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

harsh said:


> What would be the point of subscribing through YouTube if it isn't going to be integrated into your live TV guide?


I think what Google is doing here is akin to Apple TV Channels, wherein you can subscribe to various 2nd/3rd-tier services like Showtime and Starz inside the Apple TV app without anything as a base subscription (i.e. you don't need to first subscribe to Apple TV+). It's a way to integrate multiple subscriptions into a single UI.

But Google being Google, they can't figure out the best way to do this. What would make more sense is if they did this inside the Google TV UI -- the home screen on devices running Google TV as well as the Google TV app for Android phones and tablets. And maybe also let those paid subscriptions flow through to the free YouTube app tied to the same Google account. For that matter, it could also flow through to the YouTube TV app, but there's no reason why anyone who isn't subscribed to the main base tier of YouTube TV should want to use that app.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> It's a way to integrate multiple subscriptions into a single UI.


Amazon and Roku have been doing this for a relatively long time. Why is this such a big deal?


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

harsh said:


> Amazon and Roku have been doing this for a relatively long time. Why is this such a big deal?


I don't think it is that big of a deal that Google is finally doing it too. Google announced it and the story got picked up for one day on tech/streaming sites that cover this kind of news. But no one much is talking about it (evidenced by the fact that only four of us have posted anything on this thread).


----------



## B. Shoe (Apr 3, 2008)

NashGuy said:


> I don't think it is that big of a deal that Google is finally doing it too. Google announced it and the story got picked up for one day on tech/streaming sites that cover this kind of news. But no one much is talking about it (evidenced by the fact that only four of us have posted anything on this thread).


Exactly. It's an update to the service. And it's nice to talk about updates to services we use...instead of dragging on about the future of NFL Sunday Ticket.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

B. Shoe said:


> It's an update to the service.


Kind of like buying your tires from a car dealership?


----------



## NashGuy (Jan 30, 2014)

B. Shoe said:


> Exactly. It's an update to the service. And it's nice to talk about updates to services we use...instead of dragging on about the future of NFL Sunday Ticket.


What will we talk about once the new NFLST contract is finally announced? Ha.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> What will we talk about once the new NFLST contract is finally announced?


Whether or not it will be available as a standalone product (not requiring any kind of "base package")?


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

NashGuy said:


> What will we talk about once the new NFLST contract is finally announced? Ha.


Why streaming will never work. The one topic that never dies.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

b4pjoe said:


> Why streaming will never work.


Streaming works now for most. Unless users start running afoul of data caps, it will likely work better as time goes by and viewers get rid of their substandard modems, routers and streaming devices.


----------



## b4pjoe (Nov 20, 2010)

harsh said:


> Streaming works now for most. Unless users start running afoul of data caps, it will likely work better as time goes by and viewers get rid of their substandard modems, routers and streaming devices.


I’m well aware how streaming is. There are those that don’t believe it.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Streaming should not require belief.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

James Long said:


> Streaming should not require belief.


It requires suspension of the disbelief that it can work.


----------



## MCHuf (Oct 9, 2011)

harsh said:


> It requires suspension of the disbelief that it can work.


No suspension needed. My wife and I have been streaming for all of our entertainment for over four years now. It works as well or better than the other providers we tried (Dish, Xfinity, WOW!).


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

MCHuf said:


> No suspension needed.


There is if your belief is that it streaming can't work or that there's _at most_ one choice for broadband connections.

Broadband is decidedly YMMV for some but there's often a better way (wireless, microwave, etc.) if you keep an open mind.


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

Streaming has worked well for us for several years with Netflix, Prime Video, Acorn, Disney+, and Paramount+. I do have a high-speed internet connection but am still using my Frontier-supplied router. YouTube TV has been solid since I switched to the service in June.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

billsharpe said:


> Streaming has worked well for us for several years with Netflix, Prime Video, Acorn, Disney+, and Paramount+.


Testimonials are great but they don't reflect everyone's experience with their current broadband provider.


----------



## B. Shoe (Apr 3, 2008)

Moderator, we can close this thread. We've taken it off the rails.


----------

