I already don’t use Hulu because their damn player always stutters on me too much, even though it spends unreasonable time buffering first.
That and I already know how to find pretty much any show as less restrictive downloadable files.
I’d consider it, if Hulu ever let me watch anything from here in Canada.
If I haven’t watched an episode for five weeks after it aired, I’m either 1) not going to watch it at all or 2) going to just wait till the whole season comes out on Netflix. So paying for the ability to watch a show five weeks after it aired, when I’m given the ability to watch it free so long as I watch it before that five week cut-off, isn’t really tempting at all. I suspect most customers feel the same way.
Oddly, if they charged for all their content, I might consider it (I gave up cable long ago). But there isn’t much reason to pay for old, already aired content.
That just says to me that the TV model sucks. 
I actually agree with you that Hulu’s ad model isn’t too bad as is, but that’s for content that is otherwise free. In this day and age, the cost of bandwidth is low enough that if I’m forking over real dollars to watch video on your website, those real dollars had damn well better replace commercial interruptions.
That’s interesting - I actually much prefer Netflix’s player. I’ve never had any streaming issues with it (whereas Hulu goes into “buffering” mode at least once an episode), and I really like how it saves your place in videos you haven’t finished. I’ve been watching a ton of Mythbusters lately, a show that lends itself to watching in small chunks, and it’s great to be able to fire it up and have it pick up where I left off yesterday within seconds.
I use Hulu quite a bit. I’ll continue using it for what few shows I can when they make this change. I’m not going to pay, though.
I can get shows for free, one way or another.
To be honest, I forget about hulu.
Whenever I miss a show, there is usually a youtube version for free that I can see.
I watched a few things on hulu back when it first started, and then just sort of forgot about it until I read threads like this.
I suppose if hulu ever got a complete catalog of ALL the old shows and every episode, it might be fun to subscribe just during the summer to catch up on some shows - but otherwise, I already have Showtime, Starz, HBO and On Demand - plus the regular cable/broadcast TV and my DVR. I guess I am not their target demographic.
I like the concept of Hulu, but I’ve never yet found a show I’d be interested in watching that they have. I might be willing to pay for, say, The Big Bang Theory, but they don’t seem to have it.
It is nice, but my main problem is that it’s difficult to skip around in the player. I like to be able to jump back or forward to certain points in a show, and Netflix’s player doesn’t do that easily. Even the player designed to stream to Blu-Ray players is a mess; fast-forwarding or rewinding is incredibly cumbersome and difficult to get just right, and every time you to it it has to rebuffer completely.
Other than that, it’s certainly usable, and I just watched a couple of movies and a Blackadder episode on it today, in fact.
Nah. I’m perfectly happy with the free service that they offer now and will continue to offer, according to the article. Hulu is mostly a background noise provider for me anyway.
I’m a little annoyed, as the article also points out that Hulu is already profitable. I know that they have a right to make as much money as the market will bear, but I don’t have to like it.
Moving beyond what I personally like/dislike, I have trouble seeing how this is going to make sense as far as Hulu’s bottom line goes. They’re main revenue stream is based on the number of eyeballs they have on the ads, and I feel like a paywall will drive away eyeballs not only on stuff behind the wall, but in general, as if you’re going to pay for streaming of older content, Netflix is a far better deal for most people for not very much more money. And if you go buy a Netflix account, you’ll probably spend more time watching that and less watching even the free Hulu content. Not to mention the multiple sources for pirated TV shows.
I predict that, like the SDMB paywall, the Hulu paywall will be an experiment that will fail.
I agree with the no “delayed airing.” Currently, only a few shows have episodes available almost the next day. For example, “Castle” is available by 6-7 AM Eastern time the following day as is “Bones.” However, “House” is only available the following week. :mad: There should be a consistent policy.
I’d consider it if they had every show from every network. As it stands, with their paltry selection of shows from a few networks? No way.
On the other hand, it may well be that they’ve run the numbers and decided that the number of likely subscriptions will make them more money than the money they’re receiving on ads on older content. If their marketing data indicates (numbers pulled from my arse) that 10,000 people would sign up at $10/month, and ad revenue on shows older than a week only brings in $80,000, then maybe the idea isn’t so crazy.
Wait, you’re saying that just because the people that run Hulu have almost certainly had dozens of people familiar with the industry spending months if not years pondering this decision by crunching real data and using actual knowledge of the situation, as well as having a real stake in the outcome, their opinion should somehow be considered more likely then the theory I spouted out after thinking about a three paragraph LA Times article (and I kinda skimmed the third paragraph) for all of twenty seconds?
That’s certainly not the way we do things in my America!
I know, I know.
As long as Russia, China and Iran run torrent sites (or allow them to be run off their countries) Hulu won’t be getting a lot of money
I only use Hulu when I’ve been a little careless about scheduling my DVR. If they start charging, I’m just going to be more meticulous in making sure I record everything at home I want. No way would paying be worth what I get out of it currently.
Well yeah, if you want to look at it that way. But all of this number crunching by major companies can crash and burn more often than you think.
Case in point: Sony and their PlayStation 3.
As I use it primarily to catch the shows that my DVR missed for one reason or another, I can’t justify paying a monthly subscription fee. I pretty much only watch one or two shows a week, if that.
Between Netflix and my DVR, Hulu is really just a redundancy.
As long as that gets me out of commercials and it opens up a larger library I could see paying that per month.