If YT Premium was offered without Music, I'd happily pay up to £7 a month for it. I'm not paying for a service I'll never use. It's the same with Adobe. I want Lightroom, but I can't get it without Photoshop - which I will never use.
I thought I'd never use photoshop but I ended up using photoshop to post on Instagram. After editing the photo in Lightroom I'd give it a white background in photoshop to get around the 4X5 crop that instagram applies to photos. Cutting off the top and bottom or the sides.
I agree with everything you said. But I do believe the amount of adds, the length and the numbers, have grown exceptional/exponential to the point it feels "off" Is it just creator greed, in some cases maybe. But it seems to ramp up more exponential since premium, so is YT bullying people into premium?
@@spicy110 and how does premium stacks up to that. So many factors, because content creators can also choose how many adds they want. Channels with adds every minute will lose me for sure. Or I will only watch it on the other browser, which has Adblock built in ;)
Thing is, I don't remember so many ads or so long. I watched a 16 minute video the other day and there were 3, 1 minute ad breaks in that vid that I couldn't skip until about 20 seconds to go. I don't remember ads until a few years ago. And I'm really fed up with the advert for baer skin hoodies. They must have thousands of them they can't sell lol. Edit plus you get ads in some vids in the first couple of minutes.
If everyone on YT but 1 person had premium that last 1 would still be hammered by adds. Corporations are never happy with just making some money they have to make all the money. I did actually recently swap from Spotify to Premium recently after your last video since Ive never really thought about YT music.
I honestly feel the amount of ads is in direct relation to how many people use ad block. I like to think if twice as many people were on premium it could be half the price. Maybe too hopeful but sadly they do not want to try pricing lower for more people. But then if you make it too cheap people think it can have no value.
@@spicy110 I agree the ad spam is in retaliation to ad block 100%. I just don't think they would ever reduce it. Maybe I'm too cynical. I do think If more people had premium then maybe the constraints on monetization might be relaxed.
That is not what I am saying, I am just saying it is not free for them and some how they need to pay for it. In your case would be watching ads and that is fine. I did and am not saying everyone should pay for premium.
@@spicy110 The creators sponsor segments are fine, I don't mind them. However, I tried Premium a while back but still got ads at the start and end of videos. The ones that get fired at you mid video were gone, but they promised no ads full stop.
I fundamentally disagree with you on the bandwidth analogy. This is like me bringing a parcel to the Amazon DC. It's my travel, my time, my bandwidth, no UA-cam. 5 minutes in, and you seem to be extremely biased about the JUSTIFICATION of UA-cam Premium. I have PROOF that UA-cam was sending ads to subscribers below 1000. Where was that revenue going to??? NOWHERE, they were sending free ads to us to view, but they were getting paid by the advertisers.
Even with Alphabets budget, the cost of running a site like YT is massive, and the pay for ads per x amount of views has been trending downwards as there's more competition each year. Its entirely fair for a site with no upfront uploading fees to display ads on your videos, and if you generate enough views, you're then able to get a portion.
My point is this: When you watch a video there is a cost in doing that to both the creator and UA-cam. There would be less ads for everyone IF more people had premiums, and it might even be cheaper with more people on board. There is no opinion or bias in the fact youtube can not be free, as in no ads, no premium, no data gathering. Secondly you don't need proof youtube runs ads on un monitized channels, it's a known and anounced thing they started doing a few years back.
@@spicy110 Listen, stop talking nonsense, I live in the UK, you are just zhitting your pants for this possible tax. Just get a real job and don't put your eggs in one basket, is that simple. BTW, paying for premium is even worse, because if that were the case, UA-cam would not necessarily have to pay you more because they would not push more ads to us. Think of it as the TV licence, one of the biggest LEGAL scams in British history. So, even worse than you are ok, to push ads to non-monetized users. It is disgusting from them and from you for swiping under the rug... like that is just fine. As long as you get your ad money, everything is COOL.
@@LordOfThunderUK The second you said "get a real job" you lost whatever credibility you had. There are plenty of people on this platform making a living wage to huge amounts of money.
AH, you were just MOANING about the possible UK TAX for the AdSense. This is another way for the UK to ripoff or tap into a revenue that does not belong to them, and you want to make sure people buy the Premium Zhit so you can continue getting paid. That is a bit of a selfish attitude, TBH. You would make a great preacher.
Haha why are you trying to push a bs narative. yes, being taxed 30% to claim back later is annoying when you should be under a tax treaty. it's not like I had not been doing that will the US for the last few years anyway when there was not a treaty. But no the video is about what I said in it and the reply to your other comment.
I always use ad block so premium pointless for me
If it's "free to you" then you, as the user, are the product
Bingo and that starts with data.
Well, then there are TVs, that cost money and still hoover up all the data and print adds on eyeballs.
If YT Premium was offered without Music, I'd happily pay up to £7 a month for it. I'm not paying for a service I'll never use.
It's the same with Adobe. I want Lightroom, but I can't get it without Photoshop - which I will never use.
I thought I'd never use photoshop but I ended up using photoshop to post on Instagram. After editing the photo in Lightroom I'd give it a white background in photoshop to get around the 4X5 crop that instagram applies to photos. Cutting off the top and bottom or the sides.
Could you get by with Darktable and Gimp?
Yarrrrr mateys!
I agree with everything you said.
But I do believe the amount of adds, the length and the numbers, have grown exceptional/exponential to the point it feels "off"
Is it just creator greed, in some cases maybe.
But it seems to ramp up more exponential since premium, so is YT bullying people into premium?
That is indeed a big question, what I do wonder is if ads are proportional to how many people use ad block?
@@spicy110 and how does premium stacks up to that.
So many factors, because content creators can also choose how many adds they want.
Channels with adds every minute will lose me for sure. Or I will only watch it on the other browser, which has Adblock built in ;)
I just realised I read comments in your voice. Lol
@@spicy110 Hahaha, I can fully understand that
Thing is, I don't remember so many ads or so long. I watched a 16 minute video the other day and there were 3, 1 minute ad breaks in that vid that I couldn't skip until about 20 seconds to go.
I don't remember ads until a few years ago.
And I'm really fed up with the advert for baer skin hoodies. They must have thousands of them they can't sell lol.
Edit plus you get ads in some vids in the first couple of minutes.
If everyone on YT but 1 person had premium that last 1 would still be hammered by adds. Corporations are never happy with just making some money they have to make all the money. I did actually recently swap from Spotify to Premium recently after your last video since Ive never really thought about YT music.
I honestly feel the amount of ads is in direct relation to how many people use ad block. I like to think if twice as many people were on premium it could be half the price. Maybe too hopeful but sadly they do not want to try pricing lower for more people. But then if you make it too cheap people think it can have no value.
@@spicy110 I agree the ad spam is in retaliation to ad block 100%. I just don't think they would ever reduce it. Maybe I'm too cynical. I do think If more people had premium then maybe the constraints on monetization might be relaxed.
If it gets to a point with YT that I have to pay I'll stop watching. As for the ads I haven't got a dog but they still keeo trying to sell me kibble.
That is not what I am saying, I am just saying it is not free for them and some how they need to pay for it. In your case would be watching ads and that is fine. I did and am not saying everyone should pay for premium.
Premium still shows you ads - so it's pointless.
I have it and I don't see ads? Unless you mean the creators sponsors segments?
@@spicy110 The creators sponsor segments are fine, I don't mind them. However, I tried Premium a while back but still got ads at the start and end of videos. The ones that get fired at you mid video were gone, but they promised no ads full stop.
Ok something there did not go right, you do not see YT served ads at all with premium.
I fundamentally disagree with you on the bandwidth analogy.
This is like me bringing a parcel to the Amazon DC. It's my travel, my time, my bandwidth, no UA-cam.
5 minutes in, and you seem to be extremely biased about the JUSTIFICATION of UA-cam Premium.
I have PROOF that UA-cam was sending ads to subscribers below 1000. Where was that revenue going to??? NOWHERE, they were sending free ads to us to view, but they were getting paid by the advertisers.
Even with Alphabets budget, the cost of running a site like YT is massive, and the pay for ads per x amount of views has been trending downwards as there's more competition each year. Its entirely fair for a site with no upfront uploading fees to display ads on your videos, and if you generate enough views, you're then able to get a portion.
My point is this: When you watch a video there is a cost in doing that to both the creator and UA-cam. There would be less ads for everyone IF more people had premiums, and it might even be cheaper with more people on board. There is no opinion or bias in the fact youtube can not be free, as in no ads, no premium, no data gathering. Secondly you don't need proof youtube runs ads on un monitized channels, it's a known and anounced thing they started doing a few years back.
@@spicy110 Listen, stop talking nonsense, I live in the UK, you are just zhitting your pants for this possible tax. Just get a real job and don't put your eggs in one basket, is that simple.
BTW, paying for premium is even worse, because if that were the case, UA-cam would not necessarily have to pay you more because they would not push more ads to us.
Think of it as the TV licence, one of the biggest LEGAL scams in British history.
So, even worse than you are ok, to push ads to non-monetized users. It is disgusting from them and from you for swiping under the rug... like that is just fine. As long as you get your ad money, everything is COOL.
@@spicy110 "There would be less ads for everyone IF more people had premiums" You can't get more naive than this.
@@LordOfThunderUK The second you said "get a real job" you lost whatever credibility you had. There are plenty of people on this platform making a living wage to huge amounts of money.
🤦
?
Arretez de vous afficher en Francais sur votre chaine youtube !
Too much grooming and fascism pushed on YT to pay for it.
But I get ya.
AH, you were just MOANING about the possible UK TAX for the AdSense.
This is another way for the UK to ripoff or tap into a revenue that does not belong to them, and you want to make sure people buy the Premium Zhit so you can continue getting paid.
That is a bit of a selfish attitude, TBH.
You would make a great preacher.
Haha why are you trying to push a bs narative. yes, being taxed 30% to claim back later is annoying when you should be under a tax treaty. it's not like I had not been doing that will the US for the last few years anyway when there was not a treaty. But no the video is about what I said in it and the reply to your other comment.