Ie show me the ads i'm missing, and let me pay for the view. It would be what, $3|5|7/m or w/e in value? Instead they're trying to strongarm you into an upcharge of $14/m for additional services. Show me the data they're harvesting from my viewing patterns and the added revenue they're getting from that. Tie that into my "cost" each month and reducing how much i owe.
But of course they won't do that. Because this isn't an exchange. This isn't a service we're paying for, it's a data harvest where they want to have their cake and eat it too. This is scummy in the same way that my music software, Spotify, is trying to expand revenue streams and shoving more crap (podcasts, audio books, etc) down my throat.
If Youtube isn't going to try and play fair then i'd rather leave (and will) than pay them.
That would only be true if Youtube proportionally split my subscription to the videos i watch.
If anything, i'm advocating for exactly what you said - more than Youtube is. Ie show me how much i owe, and then whatever money i give youtube goes to content creators and the service provider. It's proportional to the service i consume, and is ultimately fair.
Instead what we get is something (in my view) massively upcharged. Bundled with service(s) i don't use, and set at a price point that i suspect well exceeds my usage of the service.
And as an added bonus, if you subscribe you get no ads on youtube! :-P
It's wild how many people unironically think "drink verification can" is in any way acceptable.
Just because someone has an internet connection doesn't mean google has to serve them videos, either.
You act like that's a gotcha when "I owe you nothing, you owe me nothing" is the state I'm arguing for.