Anyone done this trick? Apparently you can get a vpn and say your location is India then subscribe to YouTube premium for about £1 a month. Just wondering if anyone has any recommendations for a vpn as I’ve never used one before

I’ve never used one but I think it’s surfshark that a lot of YouTubers promote with an 80% off code.

So if you VPN out of India, do you just need to do that to sign up, or do you need to do that to actually use YouTube? I get loads of suggestions for videos of overloaded river boats going under a bridge somewhere, and some guys helping trucks go round a steep hairpin bend on a mountain, so it would be a downside if my feed gets clogged up with India videos 🙂

I believe it’s just to sign up

Also interested in this – a mate told me the same thing.

There are free VPNs but I don’t know if I trust them with credit card info.

NordVPN is something like £2.40/mo if you sign up for 3 years, but as above perhaps I only need it temporarily?

Just make sure you back your photos up incase Google lock your account (happened to a colleague).

Or you could just pay the £11.99/mth (UK), for which you get all ads removed, ability to download and watch offline the massive array of content, plus full access to YT music premium, unlimited music streaming and downloads. Sounds like a good deal to me!

KeepSolid VPN lifetime subscription is $199.

If you go via one of several sponsored links such as StackSocial it’s $40. The offer will tell you there’s a couple of days left but when it runs out it immediately resets; it’s currently saying three days remaining, I bought it via that offer maybe two years ago.

The coupon code DN40 at checkout will knock a further 40% off.

That’s a rock-solid lifetime VPN for five devices for £17. You’re welcome.

Yes it works just fine. YouTube Premium for £1.25 per month. NordVPN has fast service & good Apps with frequent signup offers.

Stack social/keep solid user here as well, vey easy to set up and use, lifetime for £34. had it a year now never any problem.

Sounds like a good deal to me!

Not to me, especially as some of the features have no value to me. I was going to sign up to YouTube premium thinking it would be around price to Netflix basic to standard (5.99-9.99) but it’s significantly more.

And that’s fine, if it’s not worth it to you don’t buy it. But that’s not the premise of this thread. Here, it’s “I want this thing, however, I’m not prepared to pay what the vendor wants for it, please advise me on how I can rip it off”. Personally, I would love to have the latest, high spec full suss Enduro bike, but no bicycle is ever going to be worth £5k to me (even though I could easily afford one), so which do we think is the correct response… is it (A) don’t buy the bike and be satisfied with my £1500 alternative or (B) start a thread on STW asking for advice on how I can con my local bike shop into selling me a brand new Nukeproof Mega for £100. I’ll give you a clue, it’s not (B).

@jmmtb,

There’s certainly part of your moral compass and mine that are aligned… however, your analogy falls down because (i) its not your LBS that’s being ripped off its “Google”, and everyone hates big tech; (ii) if Nukeproof Mega’s were available for a fraction of the UK cost by pretending to live in India I’m sure people would be finding ways to do it; (iii) if google want to stop this enough – they’ll find technical solutions to do so, much like Netflix with account sharing, they want market penetration so will let it happen then roast you later (given how prevalent Google are in our lives it could be a total PITA if they decide now or later to lock your account).

However, who really suffers? Well potentially the artists on Youtube music, or other services who probably get a smaller payment. So IF @bigyim intends to listen to music etc he may be hurting those who make the content he values enough to pay for!

So it’s OK to rip them off if we all agree that they deserve to be ripped off? Really? Or if they are rich enough to be ripped off? I think Tesco have plenty of money, and they’re mean to farmers, should I start a thread asking for advice on shoplifting from Tesco? Cue Monty Python sketch…
Yeh, fk Google, what have they ever done for us… (Google Maps, Google Search, Google Earth (and Earth Engine), Google Translate…..etc. etc.) all free to use, and YouTube, also free to use (with adverts and download restrictions).Ok, I’m probably sounding too much of a fan boy here, but was just struck by the wayward moral compass that Internet Services, and the assumption that it’s OK to rip them off if you can, engender. And frankly staggered that moderators on this (content providing) Internet platform (STW) don’t pick up on it. And finally, at risk of being slightly facetious, your point that if Google don’t want to be ripped off it’s their responsibility to do something about it? So it’s your fault if your bike gets nicked because thieves manage to break into your shed! To look at this another way, perhaps Google are just being good enough to offer much cheaper subscriptions to poorer countries, and subsidise this by charging more in richer countries who can easily afford it. Do we think the correct response is for those in rich countries to find a way to fool Google into thinking they are in the poorer country and thus pay the smaller fee. Sound like freeloading ***ts to me.

Google are happy enough to pretend they are in another country when their tax bill comes in.

So two wrongs make a right?
Assuming, of course, that is a wrong on Google’s part rather than a failure of global governments to work together to close tax loopholes because it suits them not to.

Google are happy enough to pretend they are in another country when their tax bill comes in.

^^this

I don’t use YouTube enough to justify 11.99/month, so the increased number of adverts has simply driven me away from the site completely instead of buying a subscription.

Wow. Imagine going through life caring that people might rip off Google

I just realised Opera browser has a free VPN built in
https://www.opera.com/features/free-vpn

Not sure it can be set to India though so not much use here

Desperate bicycle… I don’t really care that much, it’s really just an interesting debate. And extremely revealing how fluid peoples’ morality is, something very well known to populists and fascists throughout history. So which do you think comes first? The dislike of the brand, therefore the acceptability of ripping them off, or the desire to rip them off justified by a manufactured dislike of them. I suspect it’s the latter. I notice the OP feels no compunction to support STW by actually paying for a subscription, despite happily using it as a forum to gain information into how to steal content from another service provider.

And finally, at risk of being slightly facetious, your point that if Google don’t want to be ripped off it’s their responsibility to do something about it? So it’s your fault if your bike gets nicked because thieves manage to break into your shed!

I’m not sure the analogy works. Its more like sharing a discount code, or promoting a special offer that was only meant to be accessible to some. Or indeed, providing a friend your Netflix password – a practice which is definitely outside their TOS but they have not done much to stop. Why? Because the greater dominance they have the better for them – I’m sure Youtube subscriptions will be similar (FWIW I have never even momentarily considered subscribing to youtube). Perhaps you’d be more comfortable if you thought of it like a night club charging £10 to get in, but with free entry before 11pm – you pop in a 9pm have a half pint, get the writband/hand stamp so you can come back later without paying and off you go.

To look at this another way, perhaps Google are just being good enough to offer much cheaper subscriptions to poorer countries, and subsidise this by charging more in richer countries who can easily afford it.

Or they have teams of people working out what people will be prepared to pay in each of those countries and set the price accordingly! I presume they also look at the value advertisers are prepared to pay to promote to someone in different countries; the model is to pay to avoid Ads – and so I assume google have determined that it makes them more money if I subscribe than if the play me ad content.

Do we think the correct response is for those in rich countries to find a way to fool Google into thinking they are in the poorer country and thus pay the smaller fee. Sound like freeloading ***ts to me.

Although with google’s resource it really wouldn’t be hard for them to make it much harder to abuse their rules than being via a VPN at the point of sign up.

Who do you think you are subsidising in poorer countries? The poorest? Probably not – you’ll be subsidising the middle classes in developing countries – often people who have are not interested in supporting the poor themselves. Its worth bearing in mind though that all of these services are available for free if you endure the adverts so it’s not like you are giving access to services. I haven’t seen google shouting about this – and it would be very much something they would shout about – so I doubt they are intentionally doing it so rich people subsidise the poor.

Now google (Alphabet) is one of the most valuable companies in the world – since we pretty much all rely on stock market growth for our pensions etc, stealing from google is potentially harming our pensions, and stealing from all of us. BUT stock market values are not based just on revenue/profit, and might actually benefit from this – which is probably why google haven’t done much to stop it! So to take the argument full circle: if a VPN and youtube sub actually helps google more than no youtube sub; are the people who chose not to pay the Indian rate harming my pension?

Or @jmmtb to summarise that long post using a slightly modified version of your words:

Assuming, of course, that is a wrong on Google’sthe customer’s part rather than a failure of global governmentsgoogle to work together to close taxsubscription loopholes because it suits them not to.

^^ what poly said. And seriously –

Yeh, fk Google, what have they ever done for us… (Google Maps, Google Search, Google Earth (and Earth Engine), Google Translate…..etc. etc.) all free to use, and YouTube, also free to use (with adverts and download restrictions).

Google did none of that “for us”, and none of it’s “free to use” except in the most superficial of senses.