Exactly. People who are saying that Hulu has value at some price point above free (cf. Gangster Octopus) are missing the point. If Hulu starts charging, I - as well as many other current users - will migrate to other existing or nascent services that are entirely free. Alessan makes this point quite nicely above.
Well I currently have -$60,000 to my name and Grandma as my only source of income, so good luck getting me to pay for anything I can get for free elsewhere.
You sold grandma?!?!
I’d be willing to pay, say 5 bucks a month, for the service IF and only IF they got better content on there. Only the latest 5 episodes of a TV show? No way. I want the whole damn series. Only 5 movies on Hulu worth watching? They better throw in a whole hell of a lot more.
I don’t mind paying for service like this but they’d sure as hell better up the content for it. I won’t buy immediately, I’ll see what they have. Hell, I’d pay 1 dollar a month never to see ads. wonder if that would make em some money. prolly not though…
Like what? Hulu offers copyrighted shows. I agree that there is a lot of “It depends…” in the equation, but I don’t think a blanket “I won’t pay for it” makes sense.
For the record, this is a meaningless (and obvious) distinction to us, the consumer.
I have always thought Hulu was “too good to be true” for a free service. Most likely the only reason Comcast didn’t kill or take it over completely so far is because it was a good test for their own online goals. Comcast was never going to let Hulu live for too long, and now the time has come for them to kill it.
Well, there’s a rule against posting links to copyrighted content on this board, so I’ll skip that and just tell you that there are at least a dozen links to semi-legal, gray area, and outright illegal websites that aggregate tv/movies in my bookmarks folder. I’d wager that I’m not the only one, either.
The problem with this is that you don’t just pay a fee, you also have to go through at least a bit of hassle to be able to make that payment. Even if they didn’t actually charge you anything, just having to provide credit card or paypal details would put a lot of people off.
Hulu was created in response to internet piracy of television shows. The networks gave viewers a free alternative to free broadcasts so people would be less inclined to download their programing illegally for free from other sources. That quote from the News Corp executive shows that they don’t understand how the internet works. If you need to make more money from Hulu, you need to do what you do with TV and make money from ads.
It sounds like she’s a continuing source of income. I bet it’s a lease.
I’ve only watched one or two things on Hulu, so the pay-to-watch model doesn’t interest me at all.
I use Hulu fairly frequently. I could probably go for $10 a month, but like others have said - no commercials, full seasons of shows, new content, etc. In fact, if they started offering new movies to stream, something like Comcast’s on demand, when the movie first comes out on DVD, it would be worth maybe $15 a month and we could all drop Netflix.
Comcast offers a service similar to Hulu, but much less content and the video quality is shit.
Problem with the “make money from ads” model is that there is little money to be made from internet ads other than keyword advertising. Also, the same 71% who won’t watch Hulu if they had to pay for it will be the same 71% who wouldn’t watch Hulu if every 22 minutes of shows had 8 minutes of advertising. 
I pay absolutely nothing to watch The Office or House and can record it for free. It’s nice to be able to catch it online when I screw up but - just as I’ve done for the last 20-something years if I miss a show - my world won’t cease to exist if I have to wait for the summer reruns to catch up.
Which is a long way of answering your question: I’d pay nothing for Hulu. Screw 'em.
And, by the way, it wouldn’t bother me in the slightest if Hulu’s programming ran as many ads as the networks do.
No, I don’t think you understand. They aren’t getting enough hits to justify the ad money they need. if the ad money isn’t there then the subscription money probably wont be their either. It was fun to watch a couple of episodes of Time Tunnel for nostalgia but they would be better off streaming Dr. Who if they want to suck out my brain.
If people are going to spend money they might as well buy the stuff they really want to begin with and dispense with the poor resolution and buffer delays.
This pretty much sums it up for me. I don’t pay for cable TV because 1> it’s too farking expensive for the amount of time I’d have to actually watch it and 2> then they make you watch ads anyway. If I’m paying for content, I only want to pay once, thanks.
If Netflix would pick up and stream more current TV shows (as far as I know, *Heroes * and Leverage are the only ones they have that I’d watch), I wouldn’t bother with Hulu at all. Currently I’m only using my *Heroes *subscription to remind me that the latest episode is up on Netflix now.
If they start charging for it, will they also let people outside the US watch it? :dubious:
What would give you that impression? I perfectly understand, hence my post.
The resolution is higher than most people have going into homes, and I almost never suffer from buffer delays.