What's new
By:

Youtube TV

Siro said:
I am not forced to buy the drinks if I want a burger. It isn't about what's correctly priced. It is about the fact that I'm paying for a lot more than I want. I don't care if one part subsidizes the other. I want the option to pay the unsubsidized price. If Youtube TV offers Roots Sports + ESPN for 35 bucks, then it is a better deal to me than Comcast's bundle. Thus they get my business. I honestly don't know what your argument is at this point. It will never happen? Nonsense. It's already happening. The cable model is better? Not to me. Not to a lot of people.

Edit: About your edit, it is still the wrong analogy. Comcast isn't offering me free fries with that burger. They are forcing me to buy fries, drink, milkshake, and make a donation to Trump University, if I want the burger. No equivalence between the two situations.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? It isn't happening. Google is offering a bundle TV package of 40+ channels most of them you don't want. You're just a fan boy with a big old Google in your mouth.
 
♪alt13 said:
What are you talking about it isn't happening. Google is offering a bundle TV package of 40 channels most of them you don't want. You're just a fan boy with a big old Google in your mouth.
Click to expand...

LOL. I like you, but you're way too stubborn. 40 channels that I don't want for $35 is better than 200 channels I don't want for $80, as long as I'm getting the Jazz games. If Youtube TV is never offered in Utah, then I'll stick with Comcast for the time being. But we know that it's being offered in some areas, and that it includes channels like ESPN and Fox Sports. It, or other services like it, will very likely find their way to SLC eventually.
 
Siro said:
Hey guys, I have an announcement. I'm opening a burger joint. The burgers will only cost $0.50, but they come with a $50 order of fries. You can throw the fries in the trash if you want, but remember that the cost of the fries subsidizes the burger. My burgers come with a ton of mayonnaise, so they are different from my competitors who are selling their burgers for $5 a piece. Look forward to taking your money.
Click to expand...

Huh? This makes no sense at all.

I pay $120 a month for Comcast internet, 240 tv channels and home phone.

In order for me to piecemeal together a hodgepodge of instruments to come close to this gets me to $90 a month...and I don't get Jazz games, BBC, HGTV and a host of other channels.

Now, I don't use all 240 channels...well, let me restate, I don't WATCH all 240 channels. But I use them. The fact that I can get Jazz games (and if I bought NBA league pass and there weren't blackouts, that would cost me an additional $120 or $10 a month), the PAC-12 Network, BBC, HGTV and I can't get that anywhere else...well, something is paying for those extra channels.

It's the 200 channels I DON'T watch.

Now, if you gave me all the channels I wanted ala carte, or added onto Sling or Youtube or whatever, the cost would be much higher than what they are reporting. Add in the costs of increased internet costs as cable tv revenue drops...and you will end up paying more than what you pay now.

We don't need more tricycles. We need more cars. The cable option gives you everything streaming does...only better. And cheaper. With more options.

And it's not even close.
 
White Chocolate said:
Not sure how what I'm doing is illegal.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz
Click to expand...


You said:

I pay $29.99 a month for high speed internet and like $7 for Netflix. I bought League Pass for only the Jazz for $66 or something like that. I used my parents Dish account to get Watch ESPN for free. FoxSports Go is free as well. You can pay $5 or less for any channel you really want. This is all on the Roku by the way. Have not had any streaming problems and haven't missed DirecTV/Dish at all. I'm saving a ton of money too as you can see. I highly recommend this option to everyone.
Click to expand...

I'd bet that you are not supposed to be using your parent's account.
 
bigb said:
You're using your parents paid subscription to get access to the WatchESPN app. You're not a paying subscriber, but you're using it.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz
Click to expand...

It's pretty simple. If you use something and aren't paying for it...you probably shouldn't be going to the temple.
 
Siro said:
LOL. I like you, but you're way too stubborn. 40 channels that I don't want for $35 is better than 200 channels I don't want for $80, as long as I'm getting the Jazz games. If Youtube TV is never offered in Utah, then I'll stick with Comcast for the time being. But we know that it's being offered in some areas, and that it includes channels like ESPN and Fox Sports. It, or other services like it, will very likely find their way to SLC eventually.
Click to expand...

Bottom Line this is somewhere in between LaserDisc and DirecTV in how disruptive it will be. Basically it's Dish. Woot!(Jazz hands) Also super happy with the Google in your mouth comment...perfect

Pats self on the back :)
 
bigb said:
You're using your parents paid subscription to get access to the WatchESPN app. You're not a paying subscriber, but you're using it.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz
Click to expand...

If that's the worst thing I'm doing in my life then I must be doing pretty good.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz
 
green said:
Huh? This makes no sense at all.

I pay $120 a month for Comcast internet, 240 tv channels and home phone.

In order for me to piecemeal together a hodgepodge of instruments to come close to this gets me to $90 a month...and I don't get Jazz games, BBC, HGTV and a host of other channels.

Now, I don't use all 240 channels...well, let me restate, I don't WATCH all 240 channels. But I use them. The fact that I can get Jazz games (and if I bought NBA league pass and there weren't blackouts, that would cost me an additional $120 or $10 a month), the PAC-12 Network, BBC, HGTV and I can't get that anywhere else...well, something is paying for those extra channels.

It's the 200 channels I DON'T watch.

Now, if you gave me all the channels I wanted ala carte, or added onto Sling or Youtube or whatever, the cost would be much higher than what they are reporting. Add in the costs of increased internet costs as cable tv revenue drops...and you will end up paying more than what you pay now.

We don't need more tricycles. We need more cars. The cable option gives you everything streaming does...only better. And cheaper. With more options.

And it's not even close.
Click to expand...
You are talking about you here.
Everyone isn't like you.

A lot of people want something different than you. A lot of people love roku, netflix, ps vue, sling, etc and hate what comcast/dish/direct offer.

I'm just glad other options are out there. You can do you and others can do something different. Not sure why you are arguing about it as if it's one or the other for everyone.
 
Siro said:
I am not forced to buy the drinks if I want a burger. It isn't about what's correctly priced. It is about the fact that I'm paying for a lot more than I want. I don't care if one part subsidizes the other. I want the option to pay the unsubsidized price. If Youtube TV offers Roots Sports + ESPN for 35 bucks, then it is a better deal to me than Comcast's bundle. Thus they get my business. I honestly don't know what your argument is at this point. It will never happen? Nonsense. It's already happening. The cable model is better? Not to me. Not to a lot of people.

Edit: About your edit, it is still the wrong analogy. Comcast isn't offering me free fries with that burger. They are forcing me to buy fries, drink, milkshake, and make a donation to Trump University, if I want the burger. No equivalence between the two situations.
Click to expand...
Best post here. Destroyed everybody on the other side of the discussion.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top