Monday, June 8, 2009
Teh Internets The New Model?
Posted by Paul Constant on Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 12:09 PM
Reportedly, Hulu is going to start charging for content, at least a little bit:
Speaking last night at an Internet Week event sponsored by The Hollywood Reporter, Jonathan Miller, News Corp.'s newly-installed chief digital officer, said he envisions a future where at least some of the TV shows and movies on Hulu, the premium video site co-owned by News Corp. (NWS), NBC Universal and Disney (DIS), are available only to subscribers.
Seems like the internet is getting ready to switch back to a pay-for-play model, but I just can't see that happening anymore. How is anyone ever going to make money off this goddamned thing?
Share via
4
Dude, until Hulu gets ALL the shows out there that I might want to watch (which, at the moment, includes the entire run of Northern Exposure), I'll survive without a TV.
5
This actually opens up a larger business opportunity: Collective subscriptions.
Imagine if you could pay, say, $8 a month, and that gets you subscriber access to the P-I, Hulu, HBO, and other sites' premium content. That's the only way it's going to work without the users resenting it.
Who wants to go into business?
6
Gee, Rupert Murdoch charging people for things -- who saw that coming? Yes, I'd pay to read The Stranger and Slog.... If we paid, would you get rid of the advertising? Of course not.
7
micropayments. I know it's the holy grail, no one has done it yet, it's complicated, blah, blah, blah, but it's the only logical thing...
8
Hulu has great content, but the actual product isn't. I don't mind the ads, but their slow download speeds, frequently "unavailable" (Busy times? Technical issues?) content and low resolution "HD", I wouldn't pay them a subscription fee.
10
we're obviously willing to pay $50/month for high speed, why don't these companies get their share from comcast?
12
I pay for Netflix, and I stream from them all the time. But I agree with 8; Hulu's product is sucky. I still download stuff from Usenet that's available at Hulu, even though it's a bit more effort to find, because I usually get better quality files from Usenet.
13
Hulu has a shitty movie selection, and they need to get the participating nets to keep ALL current season eps available, PLUS as @4 suggests, putting their entire archives/catalogues online, THEN maybe people would consider paying a modest monthly or annual subscription fee in exchange for that convenience of one-stop-shopping.
Until that happens though, there are simply too many other free alternatives out there, and all the suits running Hulu are going to see is massive migration to those alternate sites.
Until that happens though, there are simply too many other free alternatives out there, and all the suits running Hulu are going to see is massive migration to those alternate sites.
14
Make something valuable (convenience being part of value) that doesn't have a free equivalent, and people will buy it.
Otherwise, they won't.
I think it's basically that simple.
Otherwise, they won't.
I think it's basically that simple.
15
How to make money? They same way TV has made money for the last $75 years. I watch Hulu's ads, just like any other TV. Just because it's coming in over copper wire instead of radio waves, what's the difference? Bandwidth can't be that much, I'm paying for half the connection via my ISP. If they want to charge for ad-free content, then fine. But I'm not going to pay $4 for a low quality movie when I can own it on DVD for $10. The industry just needs to adapt. In the future there's not going to be a separate TV service, phone service, ISP, etc.. it's all just going to be bits on the network. I got rid of Cable TV 2 years ago and never have missed it since. Hulu and DVDs have been fine in its place. And if Hulu starts to suck, I'll just keep renting DVDs.
16
Let me get this straight, you're worried about our mega media corporations making money?! Not to worry, those assholes know how to make money. They just want to make *more* money than they already are.
18
It's like the drug dealers do: "No, you don't need to pay me, go ahead, enjoy it... tell all your friends."
-one week later-
"So you liked it huh? You want more? $200. Or suck my cock. Take your pick."
-one week later-
"So you liked it huh? You want more? $200. Or suck my cock. Take your pick."
19
I haven't had cable for several years now and it's not because I'm an anti-TV snob. I watch lots of popular shows by renting disks from Netflix. For years I've been bitching about the cable business model--lots of money for lots of cable channels I won't watch. If somebody comes up with a model where I can pay for just the stuff I want, when I want it, I'll pay, sign me up.
21
That's cute, capitalism trying to find a home on the internet. I'd feel sorry for anyone stupid enough to give hulu a dime. The only possibility they have of a price plan is $5 a month, unlimited viewing and no ads. Anything less and the site will be laughed off the face of the internet, however I probably shouldn't underestimate the stupidity of internet users. :P
I however won't be giving a dime to news corpse no matter what the material, they can shove their price models right up their own ass.
I however won't be giving a dime to news corpse no matter what the material, they can shove their price models right up their own ass.
22
Hulu would need to do the following things for paid content to make any sense:
1. Offer true HD streaming (their HD right now isn't *really* HD)
2. Offer paid content without any ads
3. Offer enough in the way of selection--like, every TV show that's ever been broadcast. Also, offer more new-release movies that you'd actually be willing to pay for a subscription to see (i.e. see them sooner than DVD release).
4. Offer first-dibs viewing on HBO and Showtime (etc.) shows like Dexter, The Tudors, Weeds, etc.--sooner than DVD release or than iTunes (cf. 3 above).
5. A low price, or scaled pricing based on viewing volume (but still a low per-episode rate). Otherwise, why not just buy the iTunes versions of the shows, or stream them illegally for free?
Barring any of those five things, a paid Hulu model would not work.
1. Offer true HD streaming (their HD right now isn't *really* HD)
2. Offer paid content without any ads
3. Offer enough in the way of selection--like, every TV show that's ever been broadcast. Also, offer more new-release movies that you'd actually be willing to pay for a subscription to see (i.e. see them sooner than DVD release).
4. Offer first-dibs viewing on HBO and Showtime (etc.) shows like Dexter, The Tudors, Weeds, etc.--sooner than DVD release or than iTunes (cf. 3 above).
5. A low price, or scaled pricing based on viewing volume (but still a low per-episode rate). Otherwise, why not just buy the iTunes versions of the shows, or stream them illegally for free?
Barring any of those five things, a paid Hulu model would not work.
23
Did you know that Seattle is one of the cities where people aren't buying the new HDTV sets?
Why? Cause most of us get cable and we can't see the point in shelling out $2000 for something that will be $600 by Xmas.
Hulu - it's a lot like that.
Why? Cause most of us get cable and we can't see the point in shelling out $2000 for something that will be $600 by Xmas.
Hulu - it's a lot like that.
24
I love Hulu. But it works the way it is (episodes of current series available for limited time; really random seasons of random older shows available all the time) because it's free. I would only subscribe if it was a low price (lower than a Netflix subscription), the ads were gone, and all episodes for included shows were available.
OTOH, if their movie selection improved I would pay a couple of dollars for 1 viewing.
OTOH, if their movie selection improved I would pay a couple of dollars for 1 viewing.
26
@25 - try reading a paper sometime. They reported it over the weekend, been covering it on CNBC, CNN, tons of other places ... except in Seattle.
We're in the top 3. I hope we win the pennant.
We're in the top 3. I hope we win the pennant.
27
See, the plan is my restaurant will make money by charging people $10 for the napkins they're used to getting for free. Now that they're hooked, they'll pay up. I'm staking my business on it.
29
All of these companies whining about how they have less money, and need to find more ways to get it out of people, seem completely cave-dwellingly ignorant of the fact that people have less money too. So GLWT.
Most Commented on Slog
-
Life and Death in a Recliner in South Carolina by Dan Savage
-
Pit Bulls! by Dan Savage
-
Becoming a Man by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Hot & Drunk by Dan Savage
-
All The Best Men Are Taken by Dan Savage
-
I Hate You, Garrison Keillor by Jen Graves
-
$2,600,000,000 by Dan Savage
-
Unreal Americans by Dan Savage
-
Precious: Brutal New Classic or African-American Bruno? by David Schmader
-
Meanwhile in Vancouver by Dan Savage
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (29) RSS