
Hulu’s Obituary - Flemlord
http://www.gunaxin.com/hulus-obituary/33092
======
alex_c
Overblown. It will likely move to a freemium model. Everyone made fun of Hulu
before it launched, but it ended up being quite good - there's no reason to
think they don't understand the impact of making it pay-only.

[http://gizmodo.com/5387909/hulus-glorious-free-days-are-
offi...](http://gizmodo.com/5387909/hulus-glorious-free-days-are-officially-
numbered)

 _Don't worry, Hulu's mission has always been to help people find and enjoy
the world's premium, professionally produced content. We continue to believe
that the ad-supported, free service is the one that resonates most with the
largest group of users and any possible new business models would serve to
complement our existing offering.

Thanks,

Betina Chan-Martin

Hulu_

~~~
byoung2
I agree that this is much ado about nothing. I would expect that the pay
version would remove the ads, or offer content sooner (eliminate the 1 day
delay for most TV shows).

~~~
ja2ke
Or allow greater back catalog access. "want to watch that whole season you
missed?" it would compete directly with Netflix and Amazon on demand that way.

~~~
gnubardt
Or to allow streaming to set top boxes. If they want to compete with netflix
that'd be a great way to do it. What makes so great netflix (beyond selection
and the ability to drop down to a dvd in the mail) is the ability to easily
stream to a tv. Relaxing on the couch is a way better watching experience than
in the chair in front of the computer I sit in all day.

~~~
byoung2
Check out PlayOn (<http://www.themediamall.com/playon/>) if you want to stream
Hulu to an XBox, PS3, etc. I use it and it works like a charm!

------
cheriot
Hulu is competing against torrents and DVRs. Their entire value add is
convenience. That makes me doubt the viability of a subscription model.

Other ways hulu could make money:

\- allow viewers to purchase music played in the show (or even just related
music)

\- link to the products that have been not so subtly placed in the show. In
all likelihood, seeing James Bond use an awesome new gadget will prompt a few
people to click a link to see more of it.

\- per show fees for things like HBO and showtime shows that cost extra
already.

\- sell dvds of the TV shows. If I can watch 4 episodes of Sons of Anarchy and
am brain dead enough to like it, I might buy the first season on DVD.

Hell, I'd actually consider some of these "content" more than
"advertisements".

~~~
mrkurt
Don't underestimate how much convenience is worth to people. Netflix's value
add over Blockbuster was convenience, Amazon's entire business model is
"convenience". I can get people to come to my house, take all my laundry, and
return it after it's been cleaned.

People value convenience in different ways, for sure, but I suspect there are
a ton of people who would value the sort of convenience that Hulu can
technically offer. I'm one of them, but I'm not entirely optimistic about how
good their execution will be.

~~~
adamc
Well, actually, that isn't true. Streaming content makes Netflix much cheaper
than renting movies (if the content serves your entertainment needs, anyhow).

I agree that convenience is worth something, but so is stable technology that
already works. If Hulu was anywhere near the cost of cable, I think most
people will stick with cable. They already own the DVRs and they already know
how to use it. If Hulu is much cheaper, it has a chance.

------
rosser
Also: Netcraft confirms, BSD is dying. That is to say, I'll believe it when
they turn out the lights. Until then, headline hyperbole ftw, or something.

I don't know if anyone else noticed, but one of the things they're expecting
to make available with their pay model is stuff like HBO's series (Entourage
was specifically mentioned, which, while not my cup of tea, implies that more
of their catalog will also be available). Hopefully, that would mean
Showtime's series, too. This is something I, and a lot of other people, would
happily pay for.

As others have mentioned, people are moving away from the cable/satellite
model, and getting their teevee from the internet in increasing numbers. Hulu
is incredibly well-positioned to make a stupid amount of money off that
phenomenon, provided they aren't unmitigated idiots about it. (Say, putting
all their content behind the pay wall, or charging subscription fees that are
a substantial fraction of the typical cable/satellite monthly bill.)

------
pmorici
For me to consider paying for Hulu the following would have to happen at
minimum...

1\. Content in HD

2\. No commercials

3\. ~ $10 - $15 per month

~~~
callmeed
Why no commercials? People pay for cable TV and almost every channel has them
(save premium movie channels).

~~~
tomjen2
That might be true, but those people are frankly stupid.

~~~
doki_pen
Ha, that seems a little strong. I know lots of intelligent people who purchase
cable.

------
buugs
One thing, if they start charging for service, they better not try to go the
cable way and charge for service but still air commercials on their content
because most tv channels now offer free viewing of episodes of most of their
shows on their website with similar viewing experience to hulu (except for
linux users).

------
nkohari
God forbid someone would _charge money_ for a valuable service! Blasphemy!

This is my all-time number one gripe about the Internet. Users too often feel
entitled to getting things for free.

~~~
davidw
They can and will get things for free because information goods' prices tend
towards the marginal price, which is 0, not the cost of production. Or at
least that's my understanding of Varian and Shapiro's "Information Rules".

~~~
encoderer
There are few examples of truly getting content for free. Time is far more
scarce for many of us than money is. The only times I even consider stealing
content is when nobody is willing to take my money for it.

Of the top of my head, I downloaded Star Trek for my dad a couple months after
it came out. He was bedridden and I wanted to see it with him. I would have
delightedly paid the cost of taking a family to the theater--$30 to $50--to
stream it online. Naturally, that wasn't possible so I spent an hour
downloading it.

It's just seldom as easy as point and click and watch. I had to download 2 or
3 crappy cam versions first.

------
bcl
I just recently dropped my $80/mo satellite bill and switched to Netflix+Roku
for the TV and Hulu and Netflix streaming on the computers. If Hulu really
does start charging it needs to be a very low fee, I'm not interested in
paying any more for entertainment than I already am.

~~~
encoderer
+1. Got a Samsung BR a few months back that does Netflix and Pandora
streaming. I've used the Netflix Watch Now since it came out a few years ago
but I watch far more now than I ever had before. Contrary to conventional
belief, their selection is really rather good. It of course wasn't always this
way. But when they inked a deal with Starz that helped a lot. It also has
always carried a lot of TV-On-DVD selections.

We use cable far less than before. I get free basic cable from my Association.
The absolute only reason I haven't canceled is the HD content. Netflix BR
selection is still sparse and there is no streaming HD.

When the day comes that I can stream HD, i'll be canceling my cable. Doesn't
even have to be 1080. I'll settle for 720. And I'd be happy to pay $20-30 a
month. It would be cheaper than Cable and I could use it away from home. Sign
me up.

