Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Google Home Speaker Upgrade Forces You Into a Trial Premium Plan

Google Home Mini Smart SpeakerMany people have Google Home Mini Smart Speakers which allow you to ask questions, set alarms and reminders, and get verbal answers and notifications. These devices are Google’s answer to Alexa.

They were quite the marvel starting in 2016, but as time went on, the voice became less useful, often saying, “sorry, I can’t help with that.” But late last year, Google incorporated Gemini, its AI platform, into the speakers as a free upgrade if you install it. And once you set it up in the Google Home app, you get an amazingly useful desktop tool that knows the answer to almost everything.

During setup, Google pitches Google Home Premium that adds extra features to the speaker beyond the basic free functionality like being able to hold a continuing conversation with the device without having to say the Google wake phrase, “hey Google” or “okay Google” after the initial inquiry. (Note, this advanced feature only works with version 2 or later of the smart speaker.)

But the way they offer this extra service — integrated into the basic setup process via a 30-day free trial — is worthy of a consumer warning. After the free trial is up, they automatically charge your credit card $100 or $10 a month if you fail to cancel. Here is the screen you see on your phone just before you are signed up for both Gemini and the premium free trial.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Google Home Premium acknowledge trial catches

There is no “accept” or “reject” button on that screen. You have to click “acknowledge” in order to finish setting your smart speaker for AI it appears. And that action subscribes you to the pay plan a month later unless you cancel on time.

It seems unfair to seemingly force people to sign up for the free trial when all you may want is the free basic upgrade to Gemini AI. And the way the setup process is presented might even fail to meet all the disclosure requirements for trial offers under the new Massachusetts “Unfair and Deceptive Fees” regulation.

We asked the company why they constructed the switch to Gemini as they did rather than simply allowing people to opt-in or opt-out of the premium plan trial separately from signing up for Gemini. Google provided an initial response which said, in part:

Users are not required to subscribe to Google Home Premium to set up or use their devices. From the screenshot you sent, it appears the user had already accepted the trial offer and was on an acknowledgement page, past the option to skip.

The spokesperson included a screenshot purported to show that just prior to the acknowledgement screen above that both an opt-in and an opt-out choice is presented at the bottom of the screen:

Google Assistant 6 month trial

The problem with that is the screenshot Google provided is for a different product and offer — Gemini Assistant 6-month trial — and not Google Home Premiun’s 30-day trial. Had such a screen been presented in the Gemini for Home setup allowing you to either sign up or reject the free trial, that would have been great. But that screen was not part of the sequence to the best of our memory.

We obtained the actual two screens users see just before they are signed up for the 30-day trial on the acknowledgement page:

Google screens prior to sign up

Since these screenshots were cut off, we asked Google to provide the full screens showing what was at the bottom. Were there only “next” or “continue” buttons (just as the entire setup process had been configured), or were there accept or reject buttons? They did not reply…twice.

Despite all this, because of Gemini’s amazing new abilities, I still encourage Google smart speaker owners to upgrade to Gemini for Home but to keep an eye on the calendar.

As an example of the brilliance of the new system, I had a neighbor ask a semi-complicated question that never would have been answerable in the old system. So she asked whether her flight back to Florida two days hence on JetBlue flight number so and so was on time. In a flash the speaker told her that at the moment it was leaving as scheduled but warned that this flight had a history of cancellations. My neighbor was absolutely blown away. And so was I.

Share this story:

 


ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Downy (Not So) Unstopables: From 84 Days of Freshness to Just One?

In what appears to be another case of skimpflation — the watering down of a product — P&G may have dramatically reduced the freshening power of its in-wash scent booster, Downy Unstopables, that you toss in the washer.

Since its introduction in 2011, the company has claimed that the fresh scent absorbed by clothing washed with Unstopables lasts for up to 12 weeks in your closet.

2012 commercial

In 2025, however, the packaging and claims have changed to a promise of only 24 hours of freshness.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Downy Unstopables old-new


2025 commercial

Why in the world would Procter & Gamble, in essence, dilute the freshness imparting capabilities of the product so dramatically? Do they really think consumers would prefer a short-lasting fresh scent to a long-lasting one (if they want any at all)? We asked P&G some very pointed questions about the change, but they did not respond.

Share this story:

 


ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Red Sox Sued Over Junk Fees, Misleading Seat Prices

A lawsuit was filed in January by some Boston Red Sox ticket buyers alleging that the ball club for a number of years advertised misleading low prices for tickets but then jacked up the total price by adding various junk fees at the end of the online purchasing transaction.

In the suit [see complaint] the consumers’ lawyers alleged:

*MOUSE PRINT:

The Red Sox’s false advertising centers on their use of drip pricing and junk fees. Specifically, the Red Sox would advertise illusorily low prices for their tickets. When purchasers attempted to buy those tickets, however, the Red Sox would add mandatory fees at the last minute, such as “Per-Ticket Fees” and “Order Fees,” that could increase the cost of a purchase by as much as 150%.

After ticket buyers saw the advertised price for the tickets they wanted and added them to their cart, a countdown clock popped up giving them five minutes to complete the transaction. Only as buyers got close to finalizing their purchase were “per-ticket fees” and “order fees” added to their bill which could substantially increase the ticket price, particularly on cheaper tickets.

For example, one of the ticket buyers in the case was purchasing a $21 ticket, but when the junk fees were added on, the total came to $31.50.

The lawsuit focuses on the 2022 to 2024 baseball seasons. After that state and federal regulations kicked in requiring the complete pricing of event tickets upfront.

In particular the FTC’s Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees went into effect in May 2025, requiring businesses that sell live-event tickets and short-term lodging to disclose the total price upfront.

Similarly, the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office issued new junk fee regulations in September 2025 requiring that the initial price shown to consumers be the total price except for shipping and government taxes.

Like Ticketmaster which was sued for similar alleged deceptive practices and subsequently started advertising complete prices upfront, the Boston Red Sox now do the same thing:

Red Sox ticket purchase 2026

You now see the total price including fees when first searching for tickets.

Share this story:

 


ADV