Anyone else hooked on hulu.com?

[IluvKingLouis]

I must confess that we don't have satelite or cable. And we don't have a DVR.....yes we're deprived.

I'm absolutley loving Hulu. I can get caught up on The Office, Kitchen Nightmares, and Celebrity Apprentice.

I'm also seeing some stuff my dd5 might lile from yesteryear, like Flipper and Nanny and the Professor.

 

[spalady]

Never heard of hulu ~ what is it?

 

[IluvKingLouis]

It's a free subscription to quite a few TV shows. Most are current, some are from recent times (The Pretender) and there are some classics,...I Dream of Jeanie, Nanny and the Professor, etc....

I love it cause I can watch a 60 minute show in 41-43 mins, and since I'm on my computer I can be answering emails, etc.

I can stop it whenever I like if I need to leave the room....ok, all you Tivo people can do that too.

Bottom line,...we've not paid $$ for cable or DVR's choosing to be less into TV. But this is fantastic!

 

[gibsontrio]

just checked it out.. i'm on a waiting list to access it ..lol.. hope I get in , i'm constantly missing my shows and would LOVE to watch them when I want

 

[Passions71203]

i am also on a waiting list...

 

[pumpkinfish]

Waiting list here too!!!!

Great idea, thanks for sharing!

 

[rluey29]

waiting list also!

 

[jenr812]

TFS! It opens to the public Wednesday!

 

[bicker]

Not sure if there was another Hulu thread, but I couldn't find any, so I'll post to this one:

Last fall, I speculated...

Internet video distribution is in its infancy, the objective, at this point, mainly to get people hooked on the distribution channel. Once it is established, the objective changes to monetization. The methods available for monetization are either commercial overlays, commercial breaks, and/or subscription fees. I think Hulu is aiming to focus more on the latter, but they could end up using some combination of the three.

There is more news on this today...

Hulu pushes forward with $9.95 subscription service | Los Angeles Times

Hulu, the popular online site for watching television shows, plans to begin testing a subscription service as soon as May 24, according to people with knowledge of the plans.​

The most interesting bit of the article is this projection, highlighted in bold.

That's why Hulu is under pressure from its owners to collect a subscription fee to both bolster revenue and train viewers to pay for online access to professionally produced content.​

The price-point they're aiming for also is interesting. In earlier articles about this, the speculation was that the fee would be closer to $5 than to $10. For me, I think this signals an intention to go quickly down the path of moving more and more of the free stuff into the subscription service, with Hulu then being able to readily point to calls from its paying subscribers for a fairer arrangement. Having access essentially to "archival" episodes of series makes sense to me at $5, but at $10, I really expect to have exclusive access to more premium content.

 

[mrudman]

I'm not sure if it was Hulu we were using or something else.. but had a blast couple wks ago watching old shows that I used to watch growing up (Fantasy Island, Doogie Howser, Love Boat, etc).. was so neat to see them again,

 

[Disneefun]

No way will I pay a fee, esp, not $10/month. I can hold out for a great sale or buy used and get whole seasons of shows on DVD for $15-20 that I can watch commercial free. That coupled with my cheapie netflix sub and streaming from there and I'm good. Hulu's nice, but it ain't that nice. They won't be "training" me to pay for content. TV's just not that important to me.

 

[bicker]

There is no question that they'll lose folks -- maybe even 90% of their current members will either abandon the site entirely or restrict themselves to the free offerings. However, the math may still work out in their favor -- almost surely will, since that still would leave a good number of people who did get "trained" and will be paying the $10, thereby generating revenue that simply was never generated before, without incuring any significant additional cost -- pure profit, conceptually.

 

[Ava]

For $10/month, I'd expect to be able to watch brand new episodes at the regular airtime. That would probably be the only perk to get me to pay for access to an online TV site, since I pay more than $10/month for my cable & DVR. If Hulu remains set up so you can't see the new episode until the next day, no way would I pay $10/month for it. If I don't mind waiting to see an episode, there are other free options.

 

[bicker]

It does seem like they've got things backward, i.e., that they should be charging for the new episodes, not for reruns. I still think it is just part of their roll-out strategy.

 

[bicker]

Hulu's New Service Being Told in No Uncertain Terms by Consumers: We Don't Like Paying for This : TVBizwire : TVWeek - Television Industry news, TV ratings, analysis, celebrity event photos

Shocking!

Anyone who thought consumers would be anything other than disappointed by having to pay for something was delusional! The issue was never a matter of whether or not consumers would be happy about paying or not. The issue was always a matter of whether there was a profitable business case to be made for Hulu - period. Profitable means that somehow they had to convert the free service into a significant-revenue-generating one.

The real question is whether or not people actually start paying: A dollar from someone voting one star in that poll is worth just as much as a dollar from someone voting five stars. Talk (i.e., voting in that poll) is cheap. Indeed, the poll isn't about what people would do so have no relevance in that regard anyway.

The second half of the real question is what happens if people don't start paying. Going back to a wholly free service, just the way it used to be, is not an option. It never was an option. That service spec was intended solely to get people hooked on the service. It was never intended to be a long-term offering. If that's the only way people would be willing to have the service, then the service need not be offered.