'Hulu Plus' Unveiled With Support for iOS Devices: $9.99 Per Month

[emaja]

I honestly think this is a FANTASTIC idea. I have been waiting for a real reason to ditch cable for good. I can cut $60 per month off my cable and still get fresh content on my schedule. I used to time shift anyway with my DVR.

Now if there was a way for me to get sports without cable - Cubs, Blackhawks, NFL Network - I'd ditch them in a heartbeat.

 

[jmorrison0722]

How is that worse than paying close to a hundred bucks or more for cable or satellite with EVEN MORE ads than Hulu?

I think $9.99 is very reasonable considering Hulu has far less ads than cable or satellite at one tenth the cost per month and with everything on demand rather than according to set schedules.

How would you watch sports or live events?

 

[ghostface147]

Well, Hulu generally serves four or five 30 second ads (on an hour show) and then the last ad is two totalling 1 minute.

I don't mind paying for a suscription, but they should only do one 1 minute ad for the entire show. And they should only do that before the shows starts. Then it would be ad free. How much? $5.99 is my limit.

 

[douglaswilliams]

Reply from Hulu

This is what is in the reply email from Hulu:

Hello from Hulu,

Thanks for requesting an invitation to subscribe to Hulu Plus. We'll send you an invite as soon as one becomes available.

Thanks for your patience.

Sincerely,
The Hulu Team
http://www.hulu.com/plus

 

[Small White Car]

I will not pay to watch ads. When will they get it? People fall into two camps: they either will watch for free ad watch ads as a result, or pay to watch content uninterrupted. I am happy with either option. But to pay AND watch ads? NO WAY.

Ok, but the going rate for that is about $50 per TV season. (Look at DVD prices.)

That adds up fast and is gonna cost a LOT more than Hulu+. Personally, I'd rather take the ads to keep the prices a bit more managable.

 

[Diode]

I'll say it again, if only the major leagues allowed for Hulu to stream live games, I could drop cable/satellite forever. Either that or have a non-blackout subscription with MLB, and NHL.

That's more of a monopoly issue with MLB and NHL then with Hulu....

But if people begin fleeing cable for things like this I can see that changing.

 

[phillipduran]

subscription based AND ad supported?

Ya, no thanks Hulu.

 

[jegbook]

I'll get this. The ads are so scarce and this is so much cheaper than TV that it's worth it. PS3+MLB+Netflix+Hulu=awesome media center.

Is MLB indeed Major League Baseball?

I'm with you all the way. And don't forget Blu-Ray! (via Netflix of course, when not streaming...)

 

[pelicanflip]

i'm definitely considering getting hulu plus.

as for ads, it never bothered me before on hulu, and i don't see why it would bother me now, especially if they allow you to have the option to watch a slightly longer ad instead of two/three separate ads

 

[SiskoKid]

Um, of COURSE subscription with ads.

You're basically getting like a mini cable subscription where you can watch whatever you want anytime. How do you think these companies make money? Off of ads and revenue from the cable providers.

This isn't some .99 cent app that doesn't have ads cause you paid for it and it took a few weeks to make.

Some perspective, folks.

 

[brsing]

hmmm, ABC has free content, CBS is coming out with free content. Until I stop paying for cable, I think I'll keep looking for free content online. Bring-on Hulu Lite.

 

[bbydon]

$9.99 a month with ads? Does it have all the content from Hulu.com? Sounds like they are getting greedy. Give me ads or give me a fee...not both.

+100

 

[deannnnn]

The only way I would even consider dropping 10 bucks a month is for an ad-free service. That's ridiculous. All of this should be offered for free, on an ad based system. I can deal with ads, but I'm not going to pay for them.

 

[alhedges]

Ads+Subscription=Fail.

 

[kiljoy616]

after I pay

After I pay all my bills, I am sure another bill should not hurt, oh wait yes it will.

 

[Razeus]

Looks like I'm getting bare bones TV with a subscription to Hulu. This is perfect and what I've been waiting for. The shows I want, when I want, even the old shows I fell in love with long ago.

The only disappoint is this is not available until 2011.

 

[Metsfan7450]

Because you don't have to wait for a title to be released on DVD to watch it?

I have a DVR to record seasons that are currently on and Netflix to catch up on shows that aren't currently on. I'm still not sure why I would also need this service and am completely confused as to why it would cost $9.99/month. That's the same as my unlimited Netflix subscription that includes tv shows and movies.

 

[andwoo]

TV stations make money off of licensing fees. So, basically, if you have cable tv, you're paying a fee for each station you watch. Unless Hulu did this, it was likely that Hulu would no longer exist as the content providers would remove all shows, since cable companies like Comcast need to pay NBC and Fox to show their programs, but Hulu wasn't paying them to show the same programs.

Also, all the discussion about ads misses the point that TV stations make significantly more money from licensing fees than ads. Ads alone are not sufficient. I won't be getting Hulu plus as I don't see a need for it with Netflix and the free Hulu, but it makes complete sense for them to charge.

 

[Razeus]

Ads+Subscription=Fail.

I can't think of any subscriptions that I have where this isn't the general model.

Let me check my subscrips to GQ, Wired, National Geo, AT&T U-Verse, local newspaper....



...nope, they all have ads.

 

[bfChris]

No need to support greedy fools

I agree with small car above. Do you have cable?

If you are old enough, you remember when cable television meant no ads on some channels. Of course rebroadcast over-the-air channels had ads, but not certain networks specifically created for cable (like American Movie Classics).

My opinion on Hulu "Plus" (Plus for their wallets, Minus for ours), absolutely NOT. I'm not paying $10 a month for tv with ads. I can get that now on my EyeTV for free.

BTW, this year $10 got you every game of the World Cup live on your phone. A month of Hollywood garbage isn't of equivalent value! There's a difference between live events and programing which can be watched anytime.

Many media execs understand this difference, but apparently not Hulu. They're floating a balloon that consumers need to pop.

Chris
I work in television

 

[jegbook]

Well, Hulu generally serves four or five 30 second ads (on an hour show) and then the last ad is two totalling 1 minute.

I don't mind paying for a suscription, but they should only do one 1 minute ad for the entire show. And they should only do that before the shows starts. Then it would be ad free. How much? $5.99 is my limit.

Really? Folks seem to have extremely high standards and short memories for their cable bill. More than $100/mo is not uncommon, and a half hour time slot has 21 min of programming and and hour slot 42 min of programming.

So, at $100/mo one pays for the privilege to watch commercials 33% of your time . And people want to pay less than $10/mo for 3% commercial time? How dows that math work out?

 

[Lord Vader]

TV is overrated.

 

[benpatient]

this is actually triple-billing, and i can't believe you guys are really thinking you would pay for this!

what kind of jobs do you people have that you can afford a 100-150 dollar a month phone bill, a 50-70 dollar a month internet bill, (which probably includes some form of TV that will carry most of what is on hulu), and then pay 10 bucks a month for hulu, and STILL have to watch ads?

I can barely use hulu at it's current resolution because i don't have 20 mb internet at home...are you guys going to upgrade your internet plans to support 720p streaming? or are you going to wait 5 minutes for hulu to buffer so you can get your premium hd video, and then wait while the absurdly loud commercials play?

I'll be surprised if they have even 20,000 paid subscribers by christmas.

 

[jav6454]

Here is the difference --

Ads in a magazine or newspaper, and some DVDs, I can easily skip over. However ads in Hulu are locked. You can't skip over them. Now when they are giving free product as they currently do, fair enough. No complaint. But when I'm paying $10 then they need to at least allow me to skip the ad if I don't want to watch it.

Same deal as cable tv. You pay extra to get the extra channels and they have ads too. Also, in cable tv, ads are locked too, you can't skip over them. Not web TiVo allows to go into the future people.

Yo can skip only after recordin and rewatching the show. That's about it.




As per Hulu plus, I'm really tempted in stoping monthly cable service and stick to Hulu. It'll be $30 cheaper.

 

[marksman]

LOL. Why I am not surprised by all the cheap bastages.

People beg and plead for this they get it, and then complain.


Don't get me wrong, I think the tv networks are stupid and insane. They spend millions of dollars to try and beg us to watch their shows for free, and then they go out of their way after that to make it impossible for us to watch their shows without significantly overpaying. The dynamic makes zero sense. If we are worth so much to them to watch their shows on network airing, then they can monetize people elsewhere as well. This is where they have failed, so they have come up with these other models.

The problem is none of these models are going to generate the same kind of income per viewer as traditional advertising has done, so it makes little sense.

Unless and of course, you realize traditional media advertising has essentially been a fraud perpetrated by the radio and tv networks for 60+ years on advertisers to get them to significantly overpay for advertising based on voodoo measurements and feedback.

Again, does not make a lot of sense for a network to spend $10-$20 million dollars promoting a new show to get people to watch it for absolutely free, but then go ahead and make it available only via pay routes like this and itunes, if you miss the first airing. It is horribly backward logic. They should be working to make the shows free to people as often as they want to watch them, and capitalizing on revenue as much as they can.

That is of course, unless they have just given up on advertising altogether. IN which case all of this stuff is either going to get MUCH more expensive, or significantly cheaper in quality.