Guilty as charged!If you're old and Cheap than Flex pack is good.
https://www.wired.com/2017/02/youtube-tv-skinny-bundle/
- Thread starter brejust
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 49
- Views 5K
No its more like Young and Poor LOL.What about young and cheap? I have Welcome pack and it comes out to $20.02 a month...
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
Ha Ha Ha, you know I'm just joking with yous.Guilty as charged!
I'm 40 and I know I'm not ready to go streaming only.
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
I'm guilty as well. I'm 37 and I like satellite and streaming both, but I am as cheap as I can possibly be on everything. I feel like spending too much is like losing too much!
Sounds like a new soap opera for The CW. (A spinoff of CBS's The Young and the Restless.)No its more like Young and Poor LOL.
The best part about Flex Pack is you have a much larger array of choices you can use only when you need them, for about the same price as many of the skinny streaming options out there.
I'm not poor, and I'm not quite old (some may disagree lol), I'm just smart. 
Old no, cheap absolutely. LolYou guys do know that Flex pack is $30 for 1 room.
And you aren't streaming to any devices with out a Sling loaded DVR.
Which adds more dough.
Both Sling Orange and Blue offer more at $40 than Flex.
And it can be used anywhere on multiple devices.
If you're old and Cheap than Flex pack is good.
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
Sent from my Nexus 6P using the SatelliteGuys app!
I am waiting for an Ala carte offering. Imagine pick 20 channels for $25, 30 channels for $35, and 40 channels for $42 and 50 channels for $50. Then you can get your locals OTA. Where I live that would add another 22 channels. Big cities would get another 50 or more channels. Of course premium channels and sports would be extra. I went through the guide and I would be satisfied with the 30 channels package with premiums and sports it would cut my bill in half. This is a dream but maybe someone will try to offer such choices.
In the end of your scenario, you would probably be paying as much if not more than what you already have,
I'm old but frugal, so I get all the programming I want, and pay the price.
Dan
Dan
The problems standing in the way of that has been discussed for years here and have so far proven to be true. Flex is the closest a non online provider has come but as you see you don't pick what individual channels you want. In fact even online you don't and when you almost can it become expensive.
Apparantly at launch and for some time after, the only way to view this service on your big TV is via Chromcast and Mirrocast type via Chrome (I think) and mobile. There will definatley be NO access via connected devices to your big TV like Roku, SonyPlay Station, Amazon Fire, etc. for some time. But YT expects to make connected devices to big TV a realality some time in the future, but they didn't say WHEN. So, with the exception of Chromecast and Mirrorcasting, this is pretty much a PC or mobile device screen service (of course, its YouTube) for the time being and this limitation keeps quite a few non-techy folks OUT of the preferred way--and sometimes ONLY way people know how--to get content to their big TV, which is using their Roku, FireTV, etc. for all such services and who believe using Chromecast is far too much trouble, complicated, etc. These people really exist. For power users on this forum, Chromecast is laughably easy, but I'm telling you, MOST people don't want to go to what they consider to be "trouble" and "complication" and "another thingy hooked up to may TV!! Why can't I watch it on my Roku or Fire like I do everything else (meaning Netflix and Hulu, SlingTV, DirecTV NOW, etc.)?" "Nevermind, I'll just keep my cable and sat subscription until it is easy for me to watch, and when they get channels I want they don't have now." That's how the majority of the consumers view all this new-fangled technology and the "trouble" to get YT's new OTT service on a nice, big, HD or UHD TV because, "I aint a watchin it on no small PC screen or my phone." They want something like the Channel Master DVR+: a box (Roku, etc. count) to connect to the big TV and start a watchin' or an app they can launch from the Roku or Fire or the like.
Since big companies own most of the popular channels, they call the shots. I am a bit surprised Dish could even put together the Flex Pack. Ala Carte would be nice to a point, but the cost per channel would be much higher.
I like the idea of a "Name Your Price" build-your-own-bundle option. That way, you know exactly how much you are going to pay, but you may have to settle for getting fewer channels as prices increase if you can't afford to upgrade to a higher-priced plan to keep the channels you already have.
Again, I'm ok with that. Even if I pay the same price now for 1/4 of the channels of my choosing, I'm out ahead. Right now, I made sacrifices of about 4 channels to cut my bill in half. If I could still keep the same price level and get the 4 channels I'm missing, and drop the 20 channels I don't want, I'm golden.and the next thing you know you'll be paying more for half the channels...
