Poll: If youtube went to a pay model, would you pay?

[Eleuthera]

Nope, not really anything worth paying for on Youtube. I managed fine before it became a thing, I'll manage again if I can't use it.

 

[Doclector]

I definately wouldn't. I'll pay gladly for a blockbuster movie, or even smaller efforts, but it simply isn't worthwhile for the majority of youtube content. True, people could perhaps make bigger things if we paid them directly to watch, but kickstarter's already helping towards that kind of stuff.

I'd be massively sad to see it go, and yes, I'd have a lot less to do with my time without it, but I flat out refuse to pay for the kind of content on youtube.

 

[Assassin Xaero]

I'd just watch free stuff. I barely watched anything on youtube until the past month or so.

 

[Genocidicles]

Nope. I'd stop visiting the site altogether, just on principle. Only scumbags start charging for something that was free previously.

 

[Queen Michael]

I've paid to get licked in the face.

I've paid for gay porn manga even though I'm not into dudes.

But I won't pay for YouTube. That's where I draw the line.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

No poll option for it but depending on what channels I would pay, but not prefer it in any way. Most of the people I like wouldn't do that anyway. Cr1tikal for example donates his partnership money to charity as it is.

 

[DRTJR]

I would not pay, at all. Then I doubt game theorist is going to be a pay channel.

 

[Hemlet]

Pfft no. There are a few dedicated channels that people clearly work hard on, sure, but there isn't anything on the site that's actually worth paying to see. Sorry youtube content providers. You're entertaining, but you're not that entertaining.

 

[lunavixen]

What a dumb idea, I have a very big feeling that the majority of people would either stop using youtube altogether, or only watch free content, I'm in the latter category myself, I don't rigorously follow any particular channels, so there is no reason for it. If i wanted to pay i'd go rent or buy a movie, or try and find the videos on other websites where i don't have to pay for it.

 

[AngloDoom]

No. I'd probably stop using Youtube altogether out of principle if that was the case.

Anyway, many of the videos I watch are often available from other sources for free. I'd just stick with those.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

I would only watch free content. To be honest though, there aren't a lot of really popular channels I watch anyway. What I would predict would happen is there would be a boom in channels that refuse to be paid for, and the larger ones would die down a bit, but at any rate, I ain't got money for that.

 

[cdemares]

I very rarely use Youtube now. It's a sometimes easier way to find videos that are on other sites, a video search engine. People already make scads of money from ad revenue on Youtube, just like TV. The advantage of Youtube is that it's free. A subscription Youtube is like a dumber Netflix.

Also, they'll be in competition with Hulu, which everyone wants to do for some reason. I don't use them either.

 

[CriticalMiss]

I wouldn't really mind so long as stuff I didn't watch was on a subscription plan, they already try to rent out TV shows and movies on youtube which I don't mind because I'll never use that service. The only way a subscription for all of YouTube would work is if they paid moderators to clean up the retardation in the comments section of almost every video, made the site look better, removed all ads and gave you a massage during every video you watch.

 

[Woodsey]

Not in a million years. The site's already becoming a pain in the arse with inane region blocks.

 

[Adeptus Aspartem]

That goes against the whole friggin concept of Youtube afaik <.<

There are enough ways to monetize Youtube already.

 

[Bocaj2000]

There's still blip and vimeo, so I can live with never using youtube ever again. Besides, compared to blip and vimeo, youtube has content the appeals to the lowest common denominator.

EDIT: What I mean by this is that subscription based content or any form of payment is against everything that youtube stands for. Last.fm started doing this and now I use Grooveshark. These are counterproductive business practices that are only produce short term profit. Google (the company that owns youtube) is smarter than that. If they choose to monetize youtube, then there will eventually be no youtube.

 

[somonels]

Though they seem to be talking about certain channels, not regular youtubeists. If they want to try cable-tv delivery over their platform, why not? It's taxed, or will be, over here and others might as well pay for it if they want.

 

[zidine100]

nope id just go to one of the many alternatives.

and so will a hell of alot of other people.

 

[Fijiman]

Like fuck I'm going to pay. Anyone who does pay is either a gullible dumbass or really really loves that person's videos. Though I can almost guarantee that many of the bigger YouTubers and any of the smaller one who are greedy enough to make people pay for their content are going to take a large hit to their subscriber numbers.

 

[Jzcaesar]

I think I watch enough videos that if I paid a small fee on a yearly basis to not watch any ads, it would be worth it, like $5/year to not see any ads. If it's much more than that I think I would balk at the fee.

Same logic I applied to the escapist, I guess.