[sniperjzp]

You can see this kind of comment in every YouTube related posts, please, there's no free lunch, either pay for the subscription or use tools to block the ads.

[Arrath]

I was paying for the subscription but then they cancelled Google Music. Ad-free youtube was just a nice perk of that.

The replacement in YouTube Music premium* does not come with the bonus of no ads on youtube videos, which I think is some straight crap. I had forgot they existed, damn near.

*Unless there is another tier of subscription I haven't noticed.

Time to look into adblocker for my phone.

[762236]

Nothing changed for me. I still have no ads on YouTube after my Play Music switched to YouTube Music.

[Arrath]

Welp, that's weird. Time to do some digging I guess.

[comboy]

I think they actually have a support you can contact - https://support.google.com/youtube/gethelp?hl=en

Now that's weird.

[Arrath]

No kidding! My biggest fear was that I'd be dealing with the Google Support Blackhole. Thanks so much for the link.

[gundmc]

I have no problem with some ads. I have a problem with midroll ads every 5 minutes and ads >> 2 minutes long when I've stepped away from my device and can't skip.

[justapassenger]

YouTube premium is available in tons of countries and they have family plans. I’ve been using it for years with my wife and it’s best money ever spent.

Just pay for the content. You aren’t forced to watch those ads.

[Simon_says]

If you give Alphabet money directly, you’re just encouraging them.

[justapassenger]

To do what? Treat me more as a paying customer, and less as a product they resell to advertisers?

I’ll happily encourage them to do that.

[Clewza313]

What does that even mean? If you watch YouTube, you're just encouraging them.

[actuator]

Why not just pay for the service?

[pb7]

Because despite the common request to "let me pay a monthly fee to not see ads", the vast majority of people are too cheap to pay up. This is why ads are as prolific as they are.

[jonas21]

Okay, but how is that relevant in this case, where you can pay to remove the ads, regardless of whether other people do?

[pb7]

Because people are too cheap to pay. I thought that was clear in my comment.

[Jtsummers]

For me it's a bit of a Catch-22. I don't watch much YouTube content anyways, but I've reduced my consumption over the years because of the ads. From what I can tell, there's nothing I want to watch anymore because I no longer know what's there (and of value to me). So the prospect of paying is absurd for me as I'd be buying something with no real value except to remove an annoyance on the few occasions each month I bother to watch something on YouTube. If I had a clearer reason to increase my YouTube consumption, I'd entertain paying.

Other video services have clearer value to me in the content they provide so I pay for them. I suspect I'm not alone in this.

[actuator]

Yeah, If you are just watching videos rarely it can be tough to justify it.

I still have some channels that I regularly consume plus travel and cooking/baking videos that I watch a lot so it made sense for me to pay for it.

[bawolff]

There is no free lunch for youtube either. Customers being less satisfied and whining about it on the internet is the cost of increasing the number of advertisements. If it wasn't, google would just put infinite adverts.

[systemvoltage]

There is a market for infinite adverts. You remember ShopTV and other TV marketing channels streaming advertisements 24/7?