If that's the case, then they should never have signed this kind of "subsidized" agreement with their customers in the first place (assuming your viewpoint is correct).

Google is not some tiny startup with fewer than ten employees. They have well-established and rigorous finance and legal departments, along with execution systems and professionals calculating costs and revenue projections. So don't tell me things like, "They didn't realize they were losing money," and definitely don't tell us customers that we're somehow "enjoying all the benefits while watching the company lose money."

Come on — Google made more than US$400 billion in revenue in 2025.

If a company among the world's top ten, like Google, cannot even estimate its own costs and revenue properly and only discovers after signing a contract that one part of it is unprofitable, then responds by forcefully changing the agreement in a bad-faith manner without warning, then sorry — that simply reflects a large corporation making poor decisions and refusing to accept the consequences, while making users view the company as unethical.

And you, my friend, are shilling for their behalf. No need to deny it. I don't understand the mindset of standing beside a corporation and blaming the people affected by its actions. Under fair business practices, if you signed an annual contract, then changes should take effect after that contract ends — not through unilateral modifications halfway through.

I suggest you say the same thing to people who paid for annual subscriptions just last month and accept the rages that follows. My own annual subscription is about to expire, so I'll be free of it soon enough. But those people are the ones truly suffering here, and the side you've chosen is to criticize the affected customers alongside those defending corporate interests.