Comments on: Hulu Will Start Charging Viewers in 2010

By: Margarette Graciano

Margarette Graciano — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 22:57:09 +0000

I skimmed to see if anyone mentioned it already.

By: Networks Set to More Than Triple Online Episode Commercials | Much To Say About Nothing

Tue, 27 Oct 2009 23:49:39 +0000

[...] story also brings to question recent news that Hulu may plan to start charging their users through some subscription methodology soon. If Hulu, along with the other network [...]

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 03:57:00 +0000

I think this is a very bad idea, and they should come up with a way to keep it free and increase revenue. More advertising or another method.

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 03:57:00 +0000

I think this is a very bad idea, and they should come up with a way to keep it free and increase revenue. More advertising or another method.

By: TV on the Brain

TV on the Brain — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:39:00 +0000

Hulu, as it is right now has a great networking model. They work with the networks, and in turn they get a huge boost. Where else can you watch tv online (legally) for free in the U.S.? You can't

Bring that to "pay", and I think you'll see a LOT of problems come in. People won't pay to watch free tv, it's that simple, ESPECIALLY when that "free tv" is incredibly limited by the networks (for example Fox has huge regulations on how long they can play, what they can play, that kind of thing).

OTOH, if they brought some use to the model (ie: charging only for HBO/SHO shows), then I can see this being a bit beneficial.

Either way they go, they have to remove ads from the "paid" material.

By: TV on the Brain

TV on the Brain — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:39:00 +0000

Hulu, as it is right now has a great networking model. They work with the networks, and in turn they get a huge boost. Where else can you watch tv online (legally) for free in the U.S.? You can’t

Bring that to “pay”, and I think you’ll see a LOT of problems come in. People won’t pay to watch free tv, it’s that simple, ESPECIALLY when that “free tv” is incredibly limited by the networks (for example Fox has huge regulations on how long they can play, what they can play, that kind of thing).

OTOH, if they brought some use to the model (ie: charging only for HBO/SHO shows), then I can see this being a bit beneficial.

Either way they go, they have to remove ads from the “paid” material.

By: Pixie Wings

Pixie Wings — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 21:40:00 +0000

I have a slow-ass computer so it takes FOREVER to watch something on our stations- I rarely have the patience. I wonder about the current war between cable and local stations- will part of the fallout there be allowing US shows to stream up here, either by the networks or Hulu?

By: Pixie Wings

Pixie Wings — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 21:40:00 +0000

By: Sam

Sam — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 21:05:00 +0000

To Hulu:

Love you. But this kind of love is conditional, especially when I know you're there not to love me, but to utilize me to monetize your wares. Right now, I can handle the ads.

But love is conditional. Change on us, and this relationship's over. break-up. Onto the next better thing.

Just try it.

To Carey: Great telegraphing, dude! Great way to sound like a corporate tool!

By: Sam

Sam — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 21:05:00 +0000

To Hulu:

Love you. But this kind of love is conditional, especially when I know you’re there not to love me, but to utilize me to monetize your wares. Right now, I can handle the ads.

But love is conditional. Change on us, and this relationship’s over. break-up. Onto the next better thing.

Just try it.

To Carey: Great telegraphing, dude! Great way to sound like a corporate tool!

By: Mark O. Estes

Mark O. Estes — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:38:00 +0000

This is an atrocity. Like Bryan said, paying for a show on iTunes and watching it on Hulu or a network website are two different things and I only purchase something off iTunes if 1) It's worth it and 2) if it's the absolute last resort. If someone is offering the same thing free (and legally), then I will most definitely go with the better deal. When Chase Carey said "It's time to start getting paid…" I immediately felt my skin start to boil… Great point out, Jon, that the guy was obviously new at his job.

By: Mark O. Estes

Mark O. Estes — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:38:00 +0000

This is an atrocity. Like Bryan said, paying for a show on iTunes and watching it on Hulu or a network website are two different things and I only purchase something off iTunes if 1) It’s worth it and 2) if it’s the absolute last resort. If someone is offering the same thing free (and legally), then I will most definitely go with the better deal. When Chase Carey said “It’s time to start getting paid…” I immediately felt my skin start to boil… Great point out, Jon, that the guy was obviously new at his job.

By: clarissa

clarissa — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:11:00 +0000

As a fellow Canadian I'm right there with you. What's weird is that I would LOVE to use Hulu and if it was available I would probably visit it more than Global, CTV or Space. To be honest with you, I'm not sure I have ever watched an episode on any of those sites online. I'm a terrible Canadian, aren't I?

By: clarissa

clarissa — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:11:00 +0000

As a fellow Canadian I’m right there with you. What’s weird is that I would LOVE to use Hulu and if it was available I would probably visit it more than Global, CTV or Space. To be honest with you, I’m not sure I have ever watched an episode on any of those sites online. I’m a terrible Canadian, aren’t I?

By: Big Derf

Big Derf — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:05:00 +0000

Can't we just watch longer commercials on hulu?

My hulu plan – Use IP tracking to find out where people are located and play full commercials and give some cut of that money to the local affiliates.

By: Big Derf

Big Derf — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 17:05:00 +0000

Can’t we just watch longer commercials on hulu?

My hulu plan – Use IP tracking to find out where people are located and play full commercials and give some cut of that money to the local affiliates.

By: Bryan Jones

Bryan Jones — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:47:00 +0000

Well, also, when people pay for movies and tv shows on iTunes, its more like buying a DVD, as in they get to take it with them. They download a file and it becomes theirs. I just don't see Hulu making this work to something more successful than their ad supported model. The only people that are really going to bite on this are the ones who aren't paying for cable and are watching ALL of their content on the internet.

By: Pixie Wings

Pixie Wings — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:47:00 +0000

Hulu doesn't stream in Canada, so it's CTV, Global or SPACE streaming for me, or (am I allowed to say this?) torrents.

**a free HD converter box and a 1978 Television.**

HEY! No slamming my TV! ;)

By: Bryan Jones

Bryan Jones — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:47:00 +0000

Well, also, when people pay for movies and tv shows on iTunes, its more like buying a DVD, as in they get to take it with them. They download a file and it becomes theirs. I just don’t see Hulu making this work to something more successful than their ad supported model. The only people that are really going to bite on this are the ones who aren’t paying for cable and are watching ALL of their content on the internet.

By: Pixie Wings

Pixie Wings — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:47:00 +0000

Hulu doesn’t stream in Canada, so it’s CTV, Global or SPACE streaming for me, or (am I allowed to say this?) torrents.

**a free HD converter box and a 1978 Television.**
HEY! No slamming my TV! ;)

By: clarissa

clarissa — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:37:00 +0000

You're absolutely right, Jon, that Hulu is currently ad-supported. But it's essentially free (beyond what we pay for our monthly/yearly internet providers) to viewers right now.

What is interesting is that yes, people are used to paying for television content, but will they also be willing to pay for that content – again – on their computers? It's almost like being charged twice, so to speak, to watch the same show (your cable provider and Hulu).

Obviously people are OK with paying for content on the internet – I think that the success of shows and movies on iTunes attests to that. The real question is are people willing to pay for content that is currently free when there are other options (free or fee-based) elsewhere. I guess we will have to see what kind of charges Hulu will put in place, as well as price, which could very well be a determining factor.

By: clarissa

clarissa — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:37:00 +0000

You’re absolutely right, Jon, that Hulu is currently ad-supported. But it’s essentially free (beyond what we pay for our monthly/yearly internet providers) to viewers right now.

What is interesting is that yes, people are used to paying for television content, but will they also be willing to pay for that content – again – on their computers? It’s almost like being charged twice, so to speak, to watch the same show (your cable provider and Hulu).

By: Bryan Jones

Bryan Jones — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:26:00 +0000

LOL Jon. I posted my comments at the same time as you, and we were both pretty close on what we said. Scary.

By: Bryan Jones

Bryan Jones — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:26:00 +0000

LOL Jon. I posted my comments at the same time as you, and we were both pretty close on what we said. Scary.

By: Bryan Jones

Bryan Jones — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:25:00 +0000

Well, if they did have a subscription only, or pay-per-view model, then no, I would no longer utilize Hulu, or at the very least the pay functions. While I can see how some of their content, specifically their movie libraries and such, could fall into a pay-per-view model, it certainly makes no sense whatsoever for their current television content. Tons of people, myself included, run to hulu any time we miss an episode of something or our DVR craps out on us. We go to hulu because 1. they're free and 2. they have the best video player out there, hands down. But if they started to charge for that content, I'd simply go directly to the network websites and view their shows there. So it wouldn't make sense for hulu to do this across the board.

I predict that they'll start either a pay-per-view or subscription model for their movies, and possibly some of their older television content, such as popular series that are no longer on television. Even at that, I think Hulu will lose in this deal in the long run, and their massive expenses into advertising this past year will be for nothing, because they're going to get TORE UP for this in the blogosphere.

By: Bryan Jones

Bryan Jones — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:25:00 +0000

Well, if they did have a subscription only, or pay-per-view model, then no, I would no longer utilize Hulu, or at the very least the pay functions. While I can see how some of their content, specifically their movie libraries and such, could fall into a pay-per-view model, it certainly makes no sense whatsoever for their current television content. Tons of people, myself included, run to hulu any time we miss an episode of something or our DVR craps out on us. We go to hulu because 1. they’re free and 2. they have the best video player out there, hands down. But if they started to charge for that content, I’d simply go directly to the network websites and view their shows there. So it wouldn’t make sense for hulu to do this across the board.

I predict that they’ll start either a pay-per-view or subscription model for their movies, and possibly some of their older television content, such as popular series that are no longer on television. Even at that, I think Hulu will lose in this deal in the long run, and their massive expenses into advertising this past year will be for nothing, because they’re going to get TORE UP for this in the blogosphere.