Hulu to go paid in 2010

Hate to rain on your guys' "oh they have to make money some how/Hulu is unsustainable while free/I'm willing to pay so Hulu employees can keep their jobs" idea but

Amel estimates that while Hulu attracts far fewer visitors per month than YouTube (8.5 million versus 89.5 million), in financial terms Hulu is actually doing better. He estimates that last year Hulu took in $65 million in U.S. ad revenue and cleared $12 million in gross profit, while YouTube generated $114 million in U.S. revenue but had no gross profit. This year Amel estimates Hulu's revenue will grow to $175 million in the U.S. and that YouTube will take in slightly less. (Neither company confirmed these figures; Amel developed revenue estimates on his own.)
Click to expand...

http://www.newsweek.com/id/185790

Hulu is actually making a profit right now. This is just businesses being greedy fucking pigs like usual.
 
If they still have commercials. Then its not worth it. fuck cable, satellite, and Hulu. Just use Netflix and get movies/shows in mail or stream it.
 
So they're even making a profit now? And I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and believe they they actually had problems now....
 
The way I watch most shows on TV is just to buy the DVD season when it comes out and have a marathon session.
 
Hilarious how so many people think they are entitled to free video entertainment and are too cheap to pay 10 bucks a month.

Corporate greed my ass, you all are just a bunch of parsimonious people.

EDIT: Also why is $$$$ardly censored? Someone fix that shit.
 
It kind of sickens me that they're a small success, and they want to start charging. I do not use cable, partly because of Hulu and my huge DVD backlog. If it's cheap enough and there's NO advertising (which I don't think would be the case) I'd still consider using Hulu.
 
[quote name='Icen']Hilarious how so many people think they are entitled to free video entertainment and are too cheap to pay 10 bucks a month.
[/QUOTE]

It's just lame for network shows that are broad cast for free, usually on the network website for free etc.

Add in that I could just get them on Netflix and watch on my TV instead of laptop (which I can't hook up to my TV) and it's just not worth paying for since I seldom use Hulu or any online video site anyway. Just as a last resort if I miss an episode of a show I'm watching live/DVRing and that's the only way to watch it.
 
fuck it then. Hulu was nice and easy for new Office episodes, so now i'll just have to torrent it. Learn the internet.

Maybe if they had it in full HD, and not just measly 480P AND with no commercials, then a reasonable fee could be in effect.
 
[quote name='Icen']Hilarious how so many people think they are entitled to free video entertainment and are too cheap to pay 10 bucks a month.

Corporate greed my ass, you all are just a bunch of parsimonious people.[/QUOTE]

I guess I'm just an ass for thinking it should work the same way TV has worked for the past 50 or 60 years, especially when the broadcasting corporations are making tons of profits from that model and are apparently even profiting off hulu right now, but still want more money.

I'm just a greedy scumbag who wants free entertainment rather than paying some amount of money you just made up.
 
[quote name='Icen']Hilarious how so many people think they are entitled to free video entertainment and are too cheap to pay 10 bucks a month.

Corporate greed my ass, you all are just a bunch of parsimonious people.

EDIT: Also why is $$$$ardly censored? Someone fix that shit.[/QUOTE]
They already have ads in the content, what more do they need? It's worked fine for broadcast TV for over half a century.
 
The reason I don't have cable is because I don't feel like paying a ridiculous amount for advertisements. There is just as much commercial as show. My guess is that Hulu is not going to scale back on advertisements even with a pay model.

It is definately not worth paying for as it stands right now.
 
[quote name='SpazX']I guess I'm just an ass for thinking it should work the same way TV has worked for the past 50 or 60 years, especially when the broadcasting corporations are making tons of profits from that model and are apparently even profiting off hulu right now, but still want more money.

I'm just a greedy scumbag who wants free entertainment rather than paying some amount of money you just made up.[/QUOTE]


Broadcast television has 5 minute commercial breaks, last time I used Hulu it had like 30 sec breaks.

Broadcast television reaches over 300 million viewers. Hulu might have 50 million.

You're not an ass for thinking it should work the same way as TV - just stupid.

"Some amount of money you just made up" - Of course I made it up dipshit. What's your point?
 
haha, this is good. i guess these guys are new to the internet. but honestly small subscription fee with no ads or free with ads is the way to go.
 
Yep, profit is an annual thing that happens all the time and there is never a need to increase profits, because companies never have to fear losses and never need to save for rainy days. Businesses are horrible. We should all remember that when we get our annual pay raises and refuse them on principle. But I guess most of us are self employed here like ol' Cheapy so that is a moot point.

[quote name='Icen']Hilarious how so many people think they are entitled to free video entertainment and are too cheap to pay 10 bucks a month.

Corporate greed my ass, you all are just a bunch of parsimonious people.

[/QUOTE]

All I know is that is it absurd and hypocritical for anyone on this site to complain about the greed of Hulu when that is what CheapAssGamer is all about, greed. We all came here to get more games and I bet most of us have more than what can actually use.

I hope if you guys ever get a business idea that your principles hold true then as well and you give all your stuff away for free because making money is apparently wrong.

Rant aside, the closest thing I can compare this to is Netflix. Netflix is slightly different with the ability to get DVDs in the mail, but just in regards to streaming it is well worth $8.95 a month. I honestly can't see Hulu being much more than that. Also keep in mind that bandwith isn't cheap and advertising revenue may even go down after this recession is over as companies scale back on advertising dollars in an effort to cut costs.

At any rate, we all need to take a wait and see approach and calm down.
 
[quote name='Icen']Broadcast television has 5 minute commercial breaks, last time I used Hulu it had like 30 sec breaks.

Broadcast television reaches over 300 million viewers. Hulu might have 50 million.

You're not an ass for thinking it should work the same way as TV - just stupid.

"Some amount of money you just made up" - Of course I made it up dipshit. What's your point?[/QUOTE]

Yet Hulu is profitable, and certainly it could never have more ads. The number of viewers could never increase either, TV has had over 300 million since its inception, that's the only reason for its success.

You're right though, I shouldn't be too cheap to pay made-up amounts of money. I'll pay their $5 per week fee.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']Yep, profit is an annual thing that happens all the time and there is never a need to increase profits, because companies never have to fear losses and never need to save for rainy days. Businesses are horrible. We should all remember that when we get our annual pay raises and refuse them on principle. But I guess most of us are self employed here like ol' Cheapy so that is a moot point.
[/QUOTE]

Except they are.

Last year they took in $65 million in ad revenue and this year they are set to bring in $175 million. If operating costs stay around the same amount they were last year (which it probably wouldn't but let's pretend it does), that would mean they'll make $122 million dollars this year. 2.69 times the amount of money and 10.16 times the profit they made last year isn't enough? Instead of charging people, they can't make it two commericals per break instead of one? No, they have to go straight for the jugular since they are such greedy fucking pigs.

Which is exactly why people like me have such violent reactions to things like this. You can't compare this to an annual pay raise. There is nothing wrong with getting compensation or your fair share but going "hey guys we need mega profits and you, the consumer, need to sacrifice to get us there" is bullshit. And it has been coming from all angles lately. Businesses charging more since profits are down instead of tightening their belt or heaven forbid not taking such massive bonuses. Employers saying work harder for less money or we'll shitcan you.

It's disgusting. Massive widespread greed at our expense and we are suppose to quietly take it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The model works now... but if they go pay an equally level of service must be requested to make sense.

Doesn't matter how much profits are in play, if the product doesn't fit the service price, it will die.

Sony's PS3 makes a great example.

Right now, Hulu works, and if they go pay, I think all I ask is that their service becomes just as good as that $5/mo as I pay.

And right now I wouldn't.... but in 2010 when they do flip over, maybe they finally will and I can justify the price.

The partial problem is that they've been giving away for just 30 second commercials.... so they are going to be slapped hard when say < a % of the total of their current watchers sign up. And maybe that's alright for Hulu.... but I know ad revenue requires eyeballs.... less watchers mean less money.
 
[quote name='Quillion']Give me a way to get that content to my TV without constructing a special HTPC, (XBox 360 Streaming, etc), and give a reasonable value proposition i.e. similar content and quality to NetFlix streaming, but with a differentiation on content, and sure. I'd pay.

I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work. Unless they screw up the model, of course. They're not really pioneering anything here.[/QUOTE]
That's ridiculous. Do you have any idea how easy it is to get a PC signal to your TV?

Desktop: If you have a dedicated video card, which I'm sure most of us do, you probably have multiple output ports. Connect one of them to your TV (it doesn't matter if the PC's far away, a long cable is fine, and fairly cheap) and change your video settings to "output picture to both monitors" or whatever it is. Little checkbox. End.

Laptop: Even easier, just leave the cable hooked to your TV and plug it in whenever you wanna watch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top