There was a time, not so long ago, when TV shows were only watched on
TV. No, not the middle ages. Users increasingly want TV on demand on
their computers, and luckily, in 2009, there are several ways to get
it. One of the most popular is Hulu,
which anyone can use to discreetly watch episodes of One Tree Hill with
their backs facing the corner and headphones on.
Hulu has been incredibly successful since it launched as a joint project between Fox and NBC Universal. Since its launch, several other networks have signed on. Even though several sites, and bittorrent, offer a free, but illegal methods to get the same content, many users have felt that Hulu, due to its superior (almost HD) quality and minimal ads, is not only more convenient, but the guilt of "stealing" content has disappeared as well.
However, things might change. Jonathan Miller, Chief Digital Officer of News Corp, Fox's parent company, said in an interview that his vision of Hulu is a subscription based service. This, of course, is not a sure thing, as there is no official word from Hulu regarding the subject. But, Mr. Miller does have a stake in the service and that lends an air of credibility.
Would you be willing to pay monthly or annually for access to Hulu? Let us know in the comments.
imcoolsobackoff
June 07, 2009 at 6:24pm
It would be completely understandable for them to offer the service they have now along with a "premium subscription" that was free of ads and had some cool extra features as well as a normal version that was free but had ads and not as many features.
shorap
June 05, 2009 at 4:36pm
As above commenters have stated, I'd bounce the second that Hulu would announce this. I don't watch enough to pay for cable and this would be true of a subscription-based Hulu service as well.
daveintosh
June 05, 2009 at 1:01pm
Who is running HULU? Drug Pushers?
Getting people hooked for free first. Damn.
I guess no more HULU for me. I already pay out the arse for cable.
cckruger
June 05, 2009 at 6:12am
I'm a huge fan of Hulu and would drop my cable service to pay for Hulu instead IF they double their content and eliminate ads during the shows (I don't care if they show one at the beginning, but uninterrupted content would make me drop cable in a heartbeat)
The value add is all about the content; I have cable but as a family we only watch a small portion of what's available. It's obviously much more appealing to pay for on-demand content, when there is enough to fulfill everyone's needs.
homemaderobot
June 05, 2009 at 5:41am
If they are really looking to make money, Hulu should charge advertisers more for "air time" rather than have us, the viewers, pick up the cost.
I think Hulu would go the way of Napster if this happened- well known, but barely used anymore.
boswellb
June 04, 2009 at 8:26pm
Let's see I dropped Cable cause I was paying too much for not a lot of content. Yeah a lot of channels but the content did not interest me. Right now, however, HULU lets me see "some" of the shows I want to see and discover new programs that I may not have caught when they originally aired. FRINGE, is one such title, never saw it when the first season ran and now I can't believe I missed it. If I had to pay for a service like HULU I would not be interested in it. I am already paying for a service like Netflix. Which gives me a movie in my mailbox and with my ROKU player watch it on my TV.
The only and I mean ONLY way I would be interested in HULU as a PAY service would be if they added it to the ROKU player menu. And then I would not pay more than 5 bucks a month for it. They would need to add much more content and NO commercials.
Hey here's an Idea you can either watch for free with commercials or pay with no commercials. but give the public a choice.
imcoolsobackoff
June 07, 2009 at 6:25pm
Fringe is actually a free show OTA already, just FYI channel 13
mactony
June 04, 2009 at 5:32pm
has anybody over there heard of a VCR people having been recording your shows since the creation of the VCRs how much money do you guys need over there? the ads that you get are a lot of money if this takes place you will lose so many people. yes some will pay but the level your at will drop alot. the cool thing about hulu to me is the seeing the old shows that I grew up on. but I want Hulu to understand the mouth you feed
(us) have teeth to bite meaning we will walk away from hulu and someone will create another project.
so to end this my position is a big NO on the subscription
ifallen
June 04, 2009 at 3:44pm
I'd just find a new program who is looking to gain from there losses if such a decision were made.
Jamie
June 04, 2009 at 1:43pm
Only if in return I could have content that was 100% ad free. Even the occasional ad in the current version of Hulu is too much for me; this is where things like iTunes and Amazon have a distinct advantage in my case. Additionally, dubious though they may be, there are too many other places to find streaming content with no fees or ads tacked on. The more time that passes, the more this brave new frontier of digital television feels like the old frontier I stopped watching a decade ago.
