YouTube TV Adds New Channels, Raises Price

YouTube TV Adds New Channels, Raises Price

Google will announce today that it is expanding the YouTube TV channel lineup by about 20 percent. But it is also raising prices a bit too.

As I write this, Google’s official post revealing the changes isn’t yet available. But here’s what’s happening.

Windows Intelligence In Your Inbox

Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday — and get free copies of Paul Thurrott's Windows 11 and Windows 10 Field Guides (normally $9.99) as a special welcome gift!

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Google announced its cord-cutting YouTube TV service in March 2017, and the service went live in April with about 40 channels and a monthly cost of $35. But the big limitation at launch was that YouTube TV was only available in the biggest TV markets in the US.

Since then, Google has expanded the service numerous times. It added family-sharing functionality in May 2017, many new markets in July and August 2017. And then it finally came to TVs, with a new client for Xbox One in October 2017, followed more recently by clients for Apple TV, Roku, and other living room set-top boxes; previous to that, YouTube TV users had to navigate the service on their phones and then cast video to their TVs.

I could see early on that YouTube TV would likely emerge as the best cord-cutting service, and when we moved to Pennsylvania in August 2017, I began testing it and other services. Within a month or so, the awkwardness of using YouTube TV via the phone had become problematic, and the service didn’t provide access to HGTV, which my wife and I watch regularly. By October, I realized that the experiment was not working, and we admitted defeat, returning to cable TV.

(Premium members: I will have an update on this situation as soon as today, and coincidental to today’s YouTube TV news.)

But Google moves quickly. And it is improving YouTube TV yet again.

First, they are adding about 10 more channels: CNN, Cartoon Network, Adult Swim, TBS, TNT, truTV, and others are available now, according to reports, and others, like MLB Network and NBA TV, are coming soon (though it’s not clear what we get for free and what is a paid add-on).

And the service will soon be available in over 100 markets, a huge increase over last year. New markets include Lexington, Dayton, Honolulu, El Paso, Burlington, Plattsburgh, Richmond, Petersburg, Mobile, Syracuse, Champaign, Springfield, Columbia, Charleston, Harlingen, Wichita, Wilkes-Barre, and Scranton.

In the bad news department, the price of the service is going up, from $35 to $40 per month starting March 13. But it’s not clear if existing subscribers can keep the original price for some time. And the new price is in line with pricing from rival services like PlayStation Vue, which starts at $40 per month.

Worse, HGTV is still not available. How am I going to explain that to my wife?

 

Tagged with

Share post

Please check our Community Guidelines before commenting

Conversation 44 comments

  • marshalltm

    Premium Member
    14 February, 2018 - 10:05 am

    <p>My suggestion for this cutting the cord:</p><p>Philo OTA service ($16 a month, includes HGTV) + WatchAir (free after hardware purchase) free to air antenna converting to digital stream around your house. Apps available for iPhone Android, fireTV</p>

    • Paul Thurrott

      Premium Member
      14 February, 2018 - 1:00 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#245637"><em>In reply to marshalltm:</em></a></blockquote><p>Thanks. I do need to look at OTA again as well.</p>

  • Stooks

    14 February, 2018 - 10:11 am

    <p>Ahhh new tech. </p><p><br></p><p>This area (TV over Internet), IOT devices and digital assistants are hot right now. That said they are all in their infancy and A LOT of stuff will rapidly change in the next 3 years and it will be a hectic mess while it is changing.</p><p><br></p><p>Personally I am just going to sit by and let everyone beta test this stuff and bleed on the edge so I can have a nice smooth transition.</p><p><br></p><p>Tomsgide has a good article, from 2/2/18 that compares Hulu Live TV, YouTube TV, DirecTV NOW, Playstation Vue and Sling TV. That said with this Google change it is already out dated and it is only 12 days old. Like I said lots will change and some contenders may even go away.</p><p><br></p><p>Google from a Joe Consumer perspective really needs to get their offerings paired way down. Their music and video offerings are simply way too many and just a mess of apps and services.</p>

    • Jeff Jones

      14 February, 2018 - 3:50 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#245639"><em>In reply to Stooks:</em></a></blockquote><p><br></p><p>I think Google is just overly fond of trying different things to see what works.</p><p><br></p><p>Youtube is the one that doesn't make sense with them trying to branch out from user generated content to commercial TV and Music. While Google already has a commercial content division over in Google Play with separate audio, video, and book apps that logically make sense.</p><p><br></p><p>However, Youtube is run almost like a separate company from the rest of Google proper. So they may have people there trying to push boundaries while Google Play sits around meeting the bare minimum. Who knows.</p><p><br></p><p><br></p>

      • Stooks

        14 February, 2018 - 7:55 pm

        <blockquote><a href="#245835"><em>In reply to DataMeister:</em></a></blockquote><p>YouTube</p><p>YouTube Red</p><p>YouTube TV</p><p>YouTube Gaming</p><p>YouTube Music</p><p>Google Play Video</p><p>Google Play Music</p><p><br></p><p>Each with their own app.</p><p><br></p><p>What did I miss? Don't get me started on their messaging clients for Android.</p>

  • Nicholas Kathrein

    14 February, 2018 - 10:12 am

    <p>Lets face it, you can't. You'll stuck for another 6 months or year till HGTV finally sees that the service is important enough for them to budge on whatever is keeping them off the service.</p>

    • Paul Thurrott

      Premium Member
      14 February, 2018 - 1:00 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#245640"><em>In reply to Nicholas_Kathrein:</em></a></blockquote><p>lol yep</p>

      • Ron Pike

        14 February, 2018 - 2:16 pm

        <blockquote><a href="#245715"><em>In reply to paul-thurrott:</em></a><em> I still think you should give dish network a shot, their welcome pack $23 a month plus tax and dvr charges included HGTV.</em></blockquote><blockquote><em>I tried Youtube TV but could not deal with not having a 30 second commercial skip button that dish has. i.e. you press it six times and most commercial breaks are skipped, there is also an auto skip option for some channels and shows.</em></blockquote><p><br></p>

  • adamcorbally

    14 February, 2018 - 10:17 am

    <p>I have a feeling that the price of these Internet TV packages will level out to around the same as cable TV in a few years time once you add it all up – which is fine but the truth is these Internet TV services are far more clunky and complex than traditional cable. Yes cable TV should be cheaper but the content providers aren't going to give anything away for free here or cheaper. The market has already shown what is willing to pay for TV, ultimately and I fear the consumer will suffer if this ever takes off. </p><p><br></p><p>In a way it reminds me of smartphones dumping the headphone jack, change for changes sake.</p>

  • Travis

    14 February, 2018 - 10:18 am

    <p>Directv Now is superior in every way except they lack an Xbox app. </p>

    • Travis

      14 February, 2018 - 10:35 am

      <blockquote><a href="#245643"><em>In reply to Travis:</em></a></blockquote><p>Directv now also has a deal where you prepay for 3 months of service – $105 minimum – you get a free 4k Apple TV. And their regular price for HBO is $5 per month. </p>

      • wshwe

        14 February, 2018 - 3:45 pm

        <blockquote><a href="#245647"><em>In reply to Travis:</em></a></blockquote><p>I took advantage of the same deal. If you don't want an Apple TV they also have special deals on Fire TV. It's evident AT&amp;T is eager to increase their market share.</p>

    • Skolvikings

      14 February, 2018 - 11:10 am

      <blockquote><a href="#245643"><em>In reply to Travis:</em></a></blockquote><p>I ended up going with PS Vue over Directv Now due to the features (better DVR, 5 simultaneous streams, picture-in-picture, etc.). There are actually a few more channels on Directv Now, but none that really mattered to my family. That said, it's all subjective and Directv Now seems to be a solid service. The free hardware is definitely a nicety.</p>

      • Travis

        14 February, 2018 - 12:29 pm

        <blockquote><a href="#245661"><em>In reply to Skolvikings:</em></a></blockquote><p>I've checked out PS Vue and love the interface. It is the lack of A&amp;E that has kept me on directvnow. I lcant go without Live PD. I have been beta testing the new directv now interface with DVR and it is definitely an improvement but still just a bit behind the PS Vue interface. </p>

        • Skolvikings

          14 February, 2018 - 4:04 pm

          <blockquote><a href="#245695"><em>In reply to Travis:</em></a></blockquote><p>Absolutely. A streaming service is only as good as the channels it supports. If you like watching channels it doesn't have, that's a non-starter. My family tends not to watch A&amp;E or History, so it wasn't an issue for us. But it definitely could be for others.</p>

      • CrownSeven

        Premium Member
        14 February, 2018 - 3:41 pm

        <blockquote><a href="#245661"><em>In reply to Skolvikings:</em></a></blockquote><p>PS Vue lost all Viacom Channels and BEIN Sports which is huge, and then raised their prices. DTV now allows for 2 streams, and their DVR is in beta.</p>

        • Skolvikings

          14 February, 2018 - 4:03 pm

          <blockquote><a href="#245831"><em>In reply to CrownSeven:</em></a></blockquote><p>PS Vue allows 5 streams.</p>

    • eeisner

      Premium Member
      14 February, 2018 - 1:21 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#245643"><em>In reply to Travis:</em></a></blockquote><p>DirecTV Now performance is TERRIBLE on the Fire Stick, though. Constant buffers, random crashes, really bad input lag… I tried the Youtube TV trial via Xbox One, and was blown away. Only thing that kept me from switching was the lack of certain channels on Youtube TV that I get on DirecTV now, partially thanks to their launch promo pricing that I still have ($60 package for $35, I believe). The now inclusion of Turner channels (TNT + Comedy Central, as well as TBS/TNT/TrueTV for March Madness matter to me) and the sports channels makes Youtube TV more compelling now. Hmmm..</p>

      • Travis

        14 February, 2018 - 2:05 pm

        <blockquote><a href="#245725"><em>In reply to eeisner:</em></a></blockquote><p>That is too bad about your performance issues. I have it on Apple TV and the performance is really good. Never really have any issues with it. </p>

  • wolters

    Premium Member
    14 February, 2018 - 10:24 am

    <p>YouTube TV was our choice in cutting the cord. It just fit better with our Google Ecosystem (Google Home Mini/Home/Max, Google Music, YouTube Red.) We don't watch a lot of TV so this is OK. We still lack our local NBC affiliate and yes, my wife wants her HGTV as much as I want my NFL Network. </p>

  • Skolvikings

    14 February, 2018 - 11:09 am

    <p>I'm still happy as can be with PS Vue. Family likes to also. It even has HGTV.</p>

    • Paul Thurrott

      Premium Member
      14 February, 2018 - 12:59 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#245658"><em>In reply to Skolvikings:</em></a></blockquote><p>The interface is just SO terrible. </p>

      • Skolvikings

        14 February, 2018 - 4:02 pm

        <blockquote><a href="#245712"><em>In reply to paul-thurrott:</em></a></blockquote><p>On what device? What is so terrible about it?</p><p><br></p><p>It's just fine for us on the Fire TV and I'm pretty snobby about bad interfaces. It's pretty horrible on Roku, I'll admit to that. Haven't tried it on Apple TV.</p>

  • Waethorn

    14 February, 2018 - 11:40 am

    <p>Internet TV is no different than cable, except that YOU have to bear the cost of the infrastructure with Internet bandwidth, not the cable company. The costs will never go down.</p>

    • davebindy

      14 February, 2018 - 12:11 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#245684"><em>In reply to Waethorn:</em></a></blockquote><p>For me, the main difference between IPTV and cable is that I'm not paying any additional money to rent equipment from a cable company, and I'm not locked into a contract. I'm not paying an extra $120 or so a month for a cable box, and if I'm no longer satisfied with my IPTV provider (for the past year, DirecTV Now), I'm gone with no penalty.</p>

      • Waethorn

        14 February, 2018 - 1:58 pm

        <blockquote><a href="#245691"><em>In reply to davebindy:</em></a></blockquote><p>Huh? You'd have to buy a Bluray player or streaming device for your TV. How is that any different? AFAIK most cable and satellite companies do allow you to buy your hardware too. And all of them support month-to-month agreements without a contract. And ABSOLUTELY NOBODY pays "$120/mth for a cable box". A cable box with a DVR usually costs well under $20/mth rent, but all the cable companies offer on-demand video now anyway.</p>

        • davebindy

          15 February, 2018 - 1:23 pm

          <blockquote><a href="#245750"><em>In reply to Waethorn:</em></a></blockquote><p>My mistake; I meant $120 a year, not $120 a month, based on what Comcast charges (last time I looked) for their least expensive converter around here.</p><p><br></p><p>The "difference" is a one time payment of $35 or so for a Chromecast or even a low-end Roku vs. that ongoing $120 a year.</p>

    • Paul Thurrott

      Premium Member
      14 February, 2018 - 1:00 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#245684"><em>In reply to Waethorn:</em></a></blockquote><p>No, it is different. You don't get a guide full of duplicate channels, for example. </p>

      • Waethorn

        14 February, 2018 - 1:56 pm

        <blockquote><a href="#245714"><em>In reply to paul-thurrott:</em></a></blockquote><p>Are you talking about time-shifted channels on cable? Well yes, if you subscribed to a service like YouTube TV in every city and state, you'd have the same thing. But as it stands, you can't. YouTube TV only supports the city that you actually reside in, and only with the channels they paid licenses for in said city.</p>

  • Daekar

    14 February, 2018 - 12:31 pm

    <p>So… the whole reason to embrace these alternative platforms is to save money by not paying for the content you don't care about. For me, that would be sports and 99% of TV dramas. It seems the longer these services evolve the more like regular cable packages they are – why bother at all, especially if not all the content is on-demand? This seems like going backwards to me.</p>

    • Chris Payne

      14 February, 2018 - 12:57 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#245708"><em>In reply to Daekar:</em></a></blockquote><p>Amen. These "skinny" bundles keep getting fatter and fatter. I don't know if it was a trick to lure customers in by the big cable (or satellite) companies, or if consumers are actually asking for more channels. Just gimme the basics a la carte!</p>

    • OligarchyAmbulance

      14 February, 2018 - 3:38 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#245708"><em>In reply to Daekar:</em></a></blockquote><p><br></p><p>There are loads of different services to choose from though. Philo is dirt cheap, because it skips sports. Sling is $20. And in the end, $40 or $50 for streaming is still less than the $100+ people pay for cable or satellite.</p>

  • dcdevito

    14 February, 2018 - 1:42 pm

    <p>I love YouTube TV. My only wish was if it would merge with the YouTube app. I would love to intermingle the content between the two. </p>

  • Chris_Kez

    Premium Member
    14 February, 2018 - 1:47 pm

    <p>Wake me when there is a service that offers all major channels a la carte, with unlimited DVR and on-demand, and easy access across all devices. I expect I'll be waiting a few more years. </p>

    • wshwe

      14 February, 2018 - 3:42 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#245745"><em>In reply to Chris_Kez:</em></a></blockquote><p>Even if channels went a la carte they would jack up prices of individual channels so you would end up paying just as much. Comcast raised the cost of high speed broadband without cable TV. No surprise there.</p>

  • richfrantz

    Premium Member
    14 February, 2018 - 2:05 pm

    <p>Is YouTube TV ad free for that price?</p>

    • wolters

      Premium Member
      14 February, 2018 - 2:46 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#245758"><em>In reply to richfrantz:</em></a></blockquote><p>I would say no, not ad free. Regular commercials on live TV and there are ad's attached to "On Demand" programs. No different from Cable or Sat. </p>

  • Jeff Jones

    14 February, 2018 - 3:30 pm

    <p>Still no Hallmark Channel and HGTV, the only two channels that get watched around my house outside of the main local channels.</p><p><br></p><p>But regarding the price increase, I'm now wondering… does Turner demand their channel pack to be on every subscriber's plan or else Youtube can't offer it at all?</p><p><br></p><p>I realize Youtube probably can't do true single channel a la carte subscriptions, but why not do it per channel collection? If Tuner costs them about $5/mo extra then make that an add on. Then break it down even further. After an initial base fee, let every group of channels be an add on based on content owners instead of artificial tiers. For example let people choose the NBC/Universal collection, or the CBS pack, or the Disney pack.</p><p><br></p>

    • Depaysant M

      15 February, 2018 - 1:43 pm

      <blockquote><a href="#245828"><em>In reply to DataMeister:</em></a></blockquote><p>In the same boat, if they’d pick up Hallmark and HGTV, I’d have the green light to dump cable and switch to YouTube TV…</p>

  • Patrick3D

    14 February, 2018 - 5:15 pm

    <p>It would seem Youtube is in a hurry to be the next Comcast. So much for the dream of "<span style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34);">à</span> la carte" TV service.</p>

  • wocowboy

    Premium Member
    15 February, 2018 - 5:00 am

    <p>Anyone thinking that subscribing to YouTube TV would mean cheaper prices for a television service than cable or satellite in the long run is pretty much delusional. Anyone thinking that the programmers are going to demand less in programming fees per customer per month from YouTube, Sony, or whatever streaming service than they get from cable and satellite providers are just as delusional. Perhaps the most delusional are the people who subscribe to several ala carte individual streaming services from programmers for the usual $8 per month, which include ads, and sometimes the same amount of ads they would be seeing via cable or satellite. The programmers are going to get the same amount of money out of you whether you subscribe to cable, satellite, or streaming service, you can guarantee that!</p>

  • slerched

    Premium Member
    15 February, 2018 - 9:18 am

    <p>Make sure you put a request in for HGTV to be added. Eventually maybe enough people will do it and they will go ahead and add it?</p><p><br></p><p>I wish I could get the service without the sports. Or at least hide the channels if I'm forced into accepting a bundle with them. I literally do not watch sports on any level. Yes, I am weird. And I don't begrudge anyone else enjoying them – enjoy away. I just don't care to watch and wish I could avoid them like I could with Dish Network and setting favorite channels.</p><p><br></p><p>First world problems.</p>

  • rextillerson

    08 March, 2018 - 4:30 pm

    <p>youtube marketplace high.. <a href="https://www.hpdriver.org&quot; target="_blank">hp driver</a></p>

Windows Intelligence In Your Inbox

Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Thurrott © 2024 Thurrott LLC