Would you pay for The Youtube Content?

[GeekinGav]

No.

 

[nowantads]

No and they will be crazy to do it. Viral harlem shake video is priceless publication. And many other teams' fans 'kinda like' manchester city because of the youtube channel.

But i'd pay for youth and eds stream subscription.

 

[WNRH]

Not for the current content, but add live youth and reserve games, past highlights etc then i would.

Who owns highlights from the 1960's etc?

 

[JustAnotherCityFan]

No
If i watch a video now, if it has an advert before it plays i often stop watching right away. I dont mind the ones where you can skip the advert after a few seconds but i have noticed some now take longer so just means i dont bother.

You should download Adblock Plus.

And no I wouldn't.

 

[Nelly's Left Foot]

NO

 

[ell]

No

 

[jimharri]

Google have owned YouTube for years. As the article suggests, this subscription is for music. Lots of people use YouTube to listen to music these days and the record companies see this as lost revenue which they used to get via single sales. Those are the "content creators" they're talking about.

And of course some people have ripped the mp3 track off youtube videos. Voila; free music. So my mate says!

 

[Danube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsDXAKerrcQ[/youtube]

 

[shed88us]

People in this thread who are talking about ads in youtube, if you are on Google Chrome (and lets face it - why wouldn't you be?) you can download an Add On called 'Ad Blocker' or a name to that effect.

 

[johnbmcr]

No and why would you when you can just go on the website and view it for free?

At the moment you can...But what if this was introduced and city restricted the content on mcfc.co.uk and put it behind a pay wall?

what's not to like and pay for? you can to see the same tired old high fives and food trolley being wheeled into changing rooms