Another "stir the chit" post from Garrett. Funny stuff. Below is my best attempt to reply with humor.While I'm happy you will have more freedoms and such, what you have now done is just moved the cost burden to the consumer rather than you paying it yourself. I already have cable TV so I was able to watch you as an included cost in my cable bill. Now to watch I have to pay for cable AND Prime or wait for how ever long it takes to publish on YT. While I get why you did it, it's not all roses for everyone. I myself already have Prime as well, but instead of you paying the Outdoor channel and making them money which you covered before, now we cover it for you AND you still make money and so does Amazon now. :O
Free content, respect for people's time by removing commercial breaks from content, and that has you complaining? Not a surprise.
Someone making a financial decision to not have a cable package or Amazon Prime might have to wait a few weeks to get it for free on YouTube. Damn, the world is coming to an end.
You choose to pay for cable. In the real world, they call that a "personal problem." If you so choose to keep your cable package, good for you.
You have a charitable inclination to the outdoor networks, feel free to make the donation. I'm not so inclined.
I'll go the route to provide more content, to more people than the shrinking audience that is traditional TV (especially outdoor TV), and be able to tell the story how I want, rather than how I am told.
Most likely, you've mistaken me for someone who gives a chit about the "problems" you mention.