[lexh]

> You're telling me i provided $14/m in ad revenue? Of course not.

Do you really think Google just set the price arbitrarily? That would be surprising.

My impression has always been that ad free tiers are actually less profitable for video providers.

[mcpackieh]

> Do you really think Google just set the price arbitrarily?

No, not arbitrarily. But that $14/mo bundles in the price of other services as well, namely Youtube Music. Youtube Music doesn't cost Google nothing, so obviously $14/mo isn't what they're getting from people in ad revenue. A comparable music subscription from spotify costs $11/mo, so subtract that from $14/mo. $3/mo is a fair estimate for what they expect to get for showing ads.

[unshavedyak]

> My impression has always been that ad free tiers are actually less profitable for video providers.

I'd be interested to see those numbers. More importantly though, i don't want to pay more than my share if we're actually talking a fair trade of services here. If the justification is cost of video hosting vs ads i'd see, then it should be variable.

Also, it's including a service i have zero interest in. So upcharging alone is insulting.