That's how they get you to pay for their ad-free version. It worked on me. I can't watch regular television anymore. We have DirecTV Now (for now) and the sheer number of advertisements is about to put me off of it entirely.
Is there anywhere that you're legally able to pay $12/mo for completely ad-free programming? The vast majority of shows are ad-free, and a 15 second ad before an episode is hardly worth getting up in arms about when the alternative is ~16-18min of ads/hr.
So this is the cherry on top. After paying for a subscription you also have to pay to not get ads? That's lame. People should start boycotting Amazon right now.
Do you mean the option to pay instead of seeing ads? I thought that was in line with what people wanted - pay if you want an ad free experience, watch ads if you want a free experience. What did I miss? (I only read the headlines this week)
So instead of owning the video files and having them on my hard drive, I should pay subscription fee as long as I want to watch it? Ok, that's a compromise I can agree to. Now, there are unskippable ads at the beginning and in the middle of the video? Hmmm, that's not what we agreed for. Wait, TWO UNSKIPPABLE ADS at the begginning? Fuck no, fuck never again I'm using any of these services.
I would love this if I trusted any online service to maintain the paid option as truly ad-free over time but I've been burned by the TV industry too many times. Ad creep ruins every paid service and ultimately just drives the price up.
I'm curious, how do you propose they pay their costs? If you are unwilling to look at ads why is it unreasonable for them to ask you to pay a subscription?
reply