The Disney vs. YouTube / Google Dispute Gets Even Worse..

I’ve been following the latest corporate clash between Disney and YouTube, and what’s striking is how much it mirrors the cable disputes of the past—except now it’s happening in the streaming world.

I dive into what’s going on in my latest video.

If you subscribe to YouTube TV, you’ve likely noticed the fallout firsthand. Disney’s channels—including ESPN and local ABC affiliates—have vanished due to a carriage dispute. In addition to losing live television, anything recorded on the YouTube DVR has disappeared too. Those recordings were effectively part of the licensing agreement, not owned by the user doing the recording, and that license is now suspended.

The tension doesn’t stop at television. Disney has also pulled all of its movies from Google’s digital stores, including YouTube and Google Play. That means you can’t buy or rent new Disney titles there anymore. Meanwhile, Google has withdrawn from the Movies Anywhere service, a consumer-friendly platform that let users sync digital movie purchases across multiple services like Apple TV, Prime Video, and (formerly) Google Play. I’ve always appreciated that system—it offered rare flexibility in a digital landscape full of restrictions—but now, for Google users at least, it’s no longer working the way it used to.

Underneath these disputes is a deeper problem: the TV industry’s outdated economic model. There was a time when networks competed on content quality and ad revenue. Now, they rely heavily on retransmission fees—payments from cable or streaming services that carry their channels. As customers cut the cord to escape rising costs, networks have responded by hiking prices even more, a cycle that keeps pushing people away.

I saw it myself before I canceled cable; I was paying $35 a month just for local TV channels. Those fees have crept into streaming too—YouTube TV’s base plan has climbed from $35 in 2017 to $83 last year, and more increases are likely if these negotiations continue to go badly for streamers.

Broadcasters, rather than adapting, are lobbying for rule changes that would let them negotiate retransmission deals station by station instead of through national networks. That would almost certainly mean higher prices and more blackouts, similar to what legacy cable customers face. They’ve packaged the effort under the guise of supporting local news, but the real motive is to extract more revenue from platforms like YouTube TV. Consumers end up paying the price, both figuratively and literally.

At the same time, the broadcast industry is making over-the-air viewing less accessible. With the rollout of the ATSC 3.0 standard—also called NextGen TV—broadcasters are adding encryption that limits what viewers can record or stream inside their own homes. It’s another way of nudging people back toward paid streaming, where networks can charge retransmission fees and control access.

All of this paints a bleak picture for consumers. The fight between Disney and Google is about who gets to collect your subscription dollars, not about improving the viewing experience. While they posture in the media against each other, viewers lose access to channels, movies, and services that once worked seamlessly. I still buy physical media for that reason—Blu-rays with digital codes I can redeem independently of these shifting corporate agreements. Those discs can’t be taken away from me in a dispute.

Eventually, Disney and Google will almost certainly strike a new deal. But when they do, the outcome is easy to predict: everything will return, and it will cost more. In the meantime, it’s another reminder of how little control consumers actually have in the streaming age, and how quickly “your” digital library can turn into theirs again.

YouTube TV Raises Prices, Again.. Now $83 a month!

YouTube TV is raising its monthly subscription cost by $10, bringing the base package price to $82.99. This increase was announced on X, formerly known as Twitter, with YouTube citing rising content costs as the reason behind the adjustment. You can see my full analysis in my latest video. 

The service operates on a model similar to traditional cable, where the YouTube pays networks a per-subscriber fee to carry their channels. These costs are then passed on to subscribers, who often pay for channels they don’t watch. This pricing model, unchanged from its cable roots, appears increasingly unsustainable as consumers look for more tailored and affordable options.

Since its launch in 2017, YouTube TV’s pricing has jumped from an initial $35 per month to its current level. While the platform initially offered a cost-effective alternative to cable, the steady increases have put pricing more in line with traditional offerings. Content providers have capitalized on the platform’s growing subscriber base, pushing for higher rates that have driven up costs year after year.

And it’s only going to get worse.. Local broadcast networks, through initiatives like the Coalition for Local News, are lobbying for the right to negotiate directly with streaming services like YouTube TV similar to how they negotiate with cable companies. Currently, local affiliates have to take whatever deal that’s negotitated for them by ABC, NBC, etc. If the local broadcasters are successful, this could further drive higher prices and lead to localized channel blackouts when agreements fail.

For those unwilling to accept these price hikes, alternatives exist. One option is to use an over-the-air antenna paired with a gateway device like the HDHomeRun or Tablo, allowing viewers to stream local channels without a subscription. Though broadcasters are exploring encryption of these signals, the method remains viable for now and eliminates recurring costs after purchasing the hardware. Gateway devices typically retail for around $150-200.

“Skinny bundles” offered by platforms like Sling, Philo, and Frndly present another option. These services offer smaller channel selections tailored to specific viewer interests at significantly lower prices. For example, Sling’s “Orange” and “Blue” packages start at $45, while Philo’s $28 plan includes popular channels like AMC and the History Channel. Frndly TV, at just $10 per month, caters to viewers focused on channels like Hallmark, A&E, Lifetime and the history channel.

Additionally, free streaming platforms like Pluto TV, Plex, and even YouTube itself provide access to a wide variety of content at no cost. These ad-supported services feature everything from local news to specialty channels, offering a no-cost solution for those willing to explore.

The continual price hikes from YouTube TV and similar services highlight the limitations of applying cable-era pricing structures to streaming. Oddly their prices are going up as viewer interest and engagement continues to decline. It’s only a matter of time before this tired business model completely collapses.

YouTube TV: A Comprehensive Review for Cord Cutters

YouTube TV is quickly becoming a popular alternative to cable television services, offering a comparable channel lineup for sometimes less money than a cable provider. In fact some cable TV companies have ditched their own services and partnered up with YouTube TV instead. That’s what happened with Frontier here in Connecticut who offers YouTube TV as their television service.

In my latest video I take a deep dive into the service to see how it works.

YouTube TV offers a robust channel lineup, including all local affiliates and a wide range of popular cable networks. However, I noticed that the service includes a lot of sports channels, which may not be of interest to non-sports fans. YouTube TV also offers family sharing, allowing each family member to have their own unique experience on the platform. However, it does limit users to three simultaneous streams unless they upgrade their service for an additional $10 a month.

The interface is user-friendly across all supported platforms, with top picks based on your viewing history front and center, filtering options, and a channel guide. It also offers a recording feature with unlimited storage, but recordings do expire 90 days. YouTube TV can be accessed via most popular smart TVs and set top boxes, phones, tablets and web browsers.

Despite its benefits, I must point out that YouTube TV follows the same failing business model as traditional cable providers, forcing users to subscribe to channels they may not watch. The service has seen significant price hikes over the years and now costs $73 a month for the basic plan. This price increase is largely due to YouTube having to pay broadcasters and cable TV networks much like traditional cable companies do.

For those of you who are tech-savvy, I suggest using the Channels DVR server, a self-hosted solution that allows users to record and watch channels through their own server. This service costs extra but offers more control over the viewing experience.

While YouTube TV offers a comprehensive solution for those looking to cut the cord, its rising costs and lack of a la carte channel selection could be potential drawbacks for many. As always, I recommend doing your research and considering your viewing habits before making a decision.