YouTube is testing a more affordable 'Premium Lite' subscription that only removes ads

[Shawn Knight]

Bottom line: Advertising has long since been a necessary evil on the Internet. As is often the case, however, some content creators go a bit overboard with ad placement. Premium Lite seems like a reasonable compromise – you’re still supporting the platform and creators’ hard work, but without paying for additional features that you might not even utilize.

YouTube is piloting a more affordable version of its premium subscription service that does away with some of the standard tier’s perks.

As first spotted by a ResetEra user, the new Premium Lite option delivers an ad-free YouTube experience in exchange for €6.99 a month (about $8.30). In comparison, YouTube’s standard Premium package eliminates ads on YouTube and YouTube Music, and additionally allows for offline downloads and background playback for $11.99 per month.

In a statement issued to The Verge, YouTube confirmed that Premium Lite is being tested in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden.

YouTube further confirmed that the new offering is in an experimental phase, and that they are considering a wider rollout based on user feedback.

Would you fork over eight bucks and change per month to remove all ads on YouTube, or are you content with being an ad-supported user? I’ve personally found myself spending a lot more time watching YouTube compared to more traditional means of video delivery, and would be tempted to pay the monthly fee to drop the ads.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/90630-youtube-testing-more-affordable-premium-lite-subscription-only.html

 

[winjer]

Ublock, Youttube Vanced...

 

[NumberSix]

£24 a year and I am in, any higher and I'll pass thanks given it isn't YouTube or Google creating the content.

 

[CrisisDog]

I haven’t had an issue with ads at the beginning of a video, but those ads that pepper longer running videos about every five to ten minutes do get annoying.

 

[SirDigby]

I have premium, but I have little interest in downloads since the pandemic has forced me to work from home, and now the company are consolidating offices which means they've axed most of my friends and will put me in a new office which I'll likely never go to. Background playback is useful for podcasts and audio only, or even standup comedy. I didn't even know Youtube music came with premium, I thought that was a separate cost.... still not going to use it.

 

[Bl00dyMinded]

Still wouldn't pay to unblock ads.

 

[ExReey]

When you pay premium to use YouTube, do they still harvest your personal data, stats and viewing habits?

 

[hahahanoobs]

Keep background play and I'll switch to it.

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

£24 a year and I am in, any higher and I'll pass thanks given it isn't YouTube or Google creating the content.

I would pay even less than that but something similar. But it really goes to show how much Google is monetizing ads on YouTube if they require you to pay so much just to remove ads. They're milking your attention for every last cent it's worth.

 

[Austinturner]

I pay for premium to watch ad free, I would take this.

I’m still annoyed that youtube allows sponsored slots in the videos by people that premium can’t remove.

 

[gnite]

I pay for premium to watch ad free, I would take this.

I’m still annoyed that youtube allows sponsored slots in the videos by people that premium can’t remove.

Get the sponsorblock browser extension. Alternatively, the Vanced android app has it built in

 

[Xclusiveitalian]

Love my Android with Youtube Vanced, something Iphone can't have. That plus ublock origin I don't ever watch ads on YT.

 

[Austinturner]

Get the sponsorblock browser extension. Alternatively, the Vanced android app has it built in

I mostly watch on iPad. I am ok with paying though I just don’t want to pay for ad free and then see ads from creators, I expect youtube to align creators and revenue and bring consistency to advertising.

edit: I had to change my comment once I looked up what sponsor-block was

 

[McMurdeR]

I pay for the Music sub, and view the YouTube and free thing as a bonus. I wouldn't pay for it on its own.
It's worth mentioning here that YouTube's recommendation algorithms are not all they're cracked up to be, and the platform itself is a cesspit of wildly unbalanced opinions and points of view, since the creators themselves go entirely unchallenged on their own content. Even the good ones are annoyingly one dimensional.

 

[Philip BM]

I’m still annoyed that youtube allows sponsored slots in the videos by people that premium can’t remove.

I have premium, and I hate that I've paid to remove ads but still have to watch them. This would be easy to fix by requiring creators to set sponsorship start and end timestamps, and then have premium accounts skip those timestamps automatically.

 

[hwertz]

I mean, for $0 a month, if they have a reasonable number of ads I can play them, and if it's unreasonable I can download the video with downloadhelper (or jdownloader) and watch it without ads. I'm not going to pay $8.33 just to not have ads for content that is after all 100% user-provided.

What they SHOULD do is do what Netflix did years ago (when they had a free option) -- it was GREAT, it played ads, but had a thing to mark if the ads were relevant or not AND actually used it to tailor the ads it played. First it figured out I didn't want ads for feminine products, geriatric pills, Medicare scams, etc.; then it figured out I wanted more car and electronics ads; then it even figured out I didn't like Hondas and quit playing the Honda ads (but played other car ads.) Besides making the ad experience actually enjoyable, it gave them marketing data on my preferences without being intrusive (since I always had the choice of not giving any info.)

 

[Fox God Records]

I haven't seen an ad on youtube in years. uBlock makes them all just disappear. I forget that other people see ads and occasionally I have to apologize for sending them links to monetized videos. Kind of like sending links to paywalled news articles. "Oops! Sorry about that. I keep forgetting that other people don't see the Internet the way I do."

 

[Axiarus]

Love my Android with Youtube Vanced, something Iphone can't have. That plus ublock origin I don't ever watch ads on YT.

Unlike you, I understand that making content on YouTube takes money. I choose to support the creators I watch and pay for Premium.

 

[Axiarus]

I mean, for $0 a month, if they have a reasonable number of ads I can play them, and if it's unreasonable I can download the video with downloadhelper (or jdownloader) and watch it without ads. I'm not going to pay $8.33 just to not have ads for content that is after all 100% user-provided.

What they SHOULD do is do what Netflix did years ago (when they had a free option) -- it was GREAT, it played ads, but had a thing to mark if the ads were relevant or not AND actually used it to tailor the ads it played. First it figured out I didn't want ads for feminine products, geriatric pills, Medicare scams, etc.; then it figured out I wanted more car and electronics ads; then it even figured out I didn't like Hondas and quit playing the Honda ads (but played other car ads.) Besides making the ad experience actually enjoyable, it gave them marketing data on my preferences without being intrusive (since I always had the choice of not giving any info.)

"Hurr durr I dont understand that hosting the most video content in the world and creating content for youtube costs money" Thats you, thats what you sound like. I prefer to support the platform that gives me entertainment.