Would you pay for YouTube channels that guaranteed you television-quality shows every month? Google has long been rumored to think it could work, and according to a report from Financial Times (paywalled), YouTube could announce subscription channels as early as this week.Online video is a booming business, but it still pales in comparison to traditional broadcasting. It's a chicken and egg scenario: Despite having nearly half the internet watch videos on YouTube every month, Google's ability to develop revenue off those users pales compared to network TV, and to do so, it needs more high quality original content, which costs a bundle.To offset those costs, YouTube has been rumored to be developing subscription channels—think a couple bucks a month for one channel—for awhile now. FT sources suggested that an announcement could come this week, with up to 50 channels at launch. While it confirmed that it was looking into channels, YouTube told FT it had "nothing to announce" with regards to subscriptions.The obvious comparison to YouTube subscription channels—which would likely include original television and film programming, along with older shows and reruns from major networks—is Netflix and Hulu, which have both cornered the film and rerun market, along with original programming.But for $1.99 a month per channel (FT's rumored number, past rumors have put them at between $1 and $5 a month), comparing YouTube channels to Netflix's $7.99 a month price isn't fair; Netflix likely will have still have far more on-demand content for the price, while YouTube's channels will be more focused on new, original programming.No, I think the comparison ought to have a wider frame: YouTube subscriptions could end being the a la carte cable packages consumers have long dreamed of. ESPN, for example, costs $5 a month whether or not you watch it, and while other cable channel fees are smaller, a $30 a month YouTube package of 15 channels you actually watch could end up being a far more compelling offer than $60 a month for 200 channels you don't care about.I don't think we're quite there yet; YouTube production budgets aren't up to legacy broadcasters' levels yet, and YouTube still has a disadvantage when it comes to being seamlessly integrated with your TV, which is key to both cable and Netflix's success. (Maybe it's time for a YouTube streambox?) Regardless, it's a fascinating premise. We'll see what shakes out soon.@derektmead
Advertisement