Comments on: Hulu to Start Charging Viewers Next Year

By: mountain_rage

mountain_rage — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 06:12:13 +0000

But your cable or satellite subscription probably isn’t, unless you are viewing illicit satellite, or free to air.

By: Chris Lee

Chris Lee — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 04:17:10 +0000

My DVR is free, and the quality is much better than Hulu, pluss I can easily fast forward through the ads, and I have no buffering issues. Just what are they trying to play at?

By: DrewWilson

DrewWilson — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 23:37:15 +0000

I don’t see how this move is suppose to convince people to switch from free high quality sources to Hulu.

By: malcolm hume

malcolm hume — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 22:07:49 +0000

It depends on how much it costs. But they have to do it, not even Google makes it on ad revenue (their profit is in the web services). If there is some value added, maybe it will work.

By: Gamer8585

Gamer8585 — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:42:18 +0000

Hulu has been a great service so far. In fact the only problem I found with it was that it didn’t have enough content.

However if they go to a full pay model its going to sink faster than concrete covered lead.

If they go to a 2 tier model people will still watch the free shows and just go back to downloading the pay shows.

However if their pay model confers other benefits (i.e. no commercials, ability to download shows, exclusive bonus content [behind the scenes, out takes, etc.]) instead of access to shows then I think they could make it work.

By: mountain_rage

mountain_rage — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:09:47 +0000

Local tv stations survive off add revnue and generate hundreds of millions of dollars. So either advertisers are not convinced by the service, or they are just incompetent. Anyway, as along as they keep some free content I’m sure they will survive. My guess is it will be a two tiered system with subscription needed for premium content.