SciTechBlog   « Back to Blog Main
October 23, 2009

Hulu to charge subscription fee

Posted: 12:23 PM ET

Popular online video service Hulu will start charging subscription fees sometime next year, says News Corp. Deputy Chairman Chase Carey.

While speaking at a recent Broadcasting & Cable summit Carey announced his plans for Hulu: “I think a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content. I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value. Hulu concurs with that, it needs to evolve to have a meaningful subscription model as part of its business.”

Hulu.com has attracted a large online audience by offering commercial-supported TV shows and movies from NBC, ABC, Fox, and other networks since 2007. However, the addition of a subscription fee may send most of Hulu's users searching for alternatives.

I use Hulu frequently to watch everything from Comedy Central's "Daily Show" to Fox's "Family Guy." I stomach the commercial interruptions in exchange for the high-quality streaming content, but I certainly won't be pulling out my credit card if the service puts up a subscription pay wall. And I doubt many other customers will be happy to start paying money for a service they previously received for free.

The move to a fee-based business model is a decision that will still have to be approved by the Hulu board, and I hope someone has the sense to blackball this idea. But common sense doesn't always prevail in the entertainment industry -  if it did, we might still have "Arrested Development."

Posted by:
Filed under: HDTV • Hulu • online news • online video


Share this on:
Travis   October 23rd, 2009 1:17 pm ET

I use Hulu almost everyday. I can tell you for certain that I'll just go back to downloading all my shows on bittorrents if they charge. I'll be damned if I pay for shows and still have to watch commercials. That's why I don't have cable...


Seth   October 23rd, 2009 1:23 pm ET

Yep, bye bye hulu.

I love it when a company thinks they need even MORE money to be sucessful, so they jack up prices, or make terrible decisions and aren't around 5 years later.

Does Coca Cola try to make drastic money changes every year? Nope, they've been around forever.


Jennifer   October 23rd, 2009 1:31 pm ET

I too will look elsewhere. I endure commercials on hulu when I dont even watch them on my own tv anymore thanks to tivo. I already pay to watch tv at home: its called cable, and I pay too much for it then!


Ben Levy   October 23rd, 2009 1:38 pm ET

I can see someone paying for this if they don't have cable, but how many people have broadband, but not cable?


Derik   October 23rd, 2009 1:57 pm ET

If people were dumping their cable connections in favor of Hulu, this would make sense.
But Hulu doesn't have the content to back that up yet. Nor could the existing broadband infrastructure support it if it did.


Dick   October 23rd, 2009 2:28 pm ET

If you charge, you can be assured I will not PAY!

News Corp. Deputy Chairman Chase Carey does not have a clue.


jack   October 23rd, 2009 3:46 pm ET

The officers of these companies must really be brain dead. If it is free over the air and has commercials, what makes them think A N Y B O D Y would pay to watch the same programing with commercials on HULU?

This is nothing more than the cable companies (can you say Comcast) who see their business models (cable TV) as the typewriter against the word processing power of the computer (the Internet).

This is about protecting the overpriced cable TV subscription. Cut off all other choices and force people to keep paying for the crap they keep programing.

Like the song says,"500 channels and nothing on". True, so true.


Brandon   October 23rd, 2009 3:49 pm ET

Forget it Hulu. I'm not gonna pay, and I doubt many others will. If you want to reduce your user numbers to a fraction of what you have today, then go ahead with this idiotic move. I for one will head elsewhere.


Pasques   October 23rd, 2009 3:53 pm ET

I won't be paying either. I dropped cable too in exchange for hulu. I might as well go back to cable. Or just stop watching TV.


erniemm   October 23rd, 2009 4:03 pm ET

Well.it was good while it lasted.....on to something else!


gracie   October 23rd, 2009 4:03 pm ET

I'm waving goodbye to Hulu when they say they should charge money for their services. Greed is not cool.


Sean   October 23rd, 2009 4:04 pm ET

They should offer both. Pay a subscription, and no commericals!


Debra James   October 23rd, 2009 4:12 pm ET

I have broadband without cable or satellite, and watch the vast majority of my programs online. It saves me about $100 month doing this.


David H   October 23rd, 2009 4:17 pm ET

Yeah. I don't pay TV cable for that exact reason, I don't wanna pay and still have to watch commercials. I'd certainly go back to torrent stuff if they start charging. I didn't even hate their commercials, they are really unobtrusive, but I definitelly won't pay for that.


John   October 23rd, 2009 4:25 pm ET

I think Hulu is great, I dumped cable TV and kept only the online service. One great thing is I can watch all the old tv shows I remember from days gone by- unfortunately watching them now makes me realize how crappy they really were and how much of my life I've wasted watching crappy TV shows. So, in retrospect I won't pay for Hulu... thanks to Hulu


steve Parlin   October 23rd, 2009 4:31 pm ET

I love hulu, and I've probably recommended it to dozens of people as I've used it for well over a year and watched literally hundreds of programs. I prefer to watch the shows I like on my schedule rather than the network schedule.

But, like the previous posters, I too will be sadly saying goodbye to Hulu if they start charging a subscription fee, since all the shows I enjoy are also available on the network websites (nbc.com, abc.com, cbs.com etc) free of charge so there are alternatives to hulu.

Another point to consider is that if Hulu does go to a paid service, the ads being viewed will be drastically reduced when people stop using the site. it seems to me that they would gain one revenue stream while losing another, especially if the paying customers demand that there are no more ads.

Theoretically, Hulu going to a paid subscription program would reduce their bandwidth usage, lowering their overall costs but the loss of customer base, coupled with the loss of ad revenues likely will reduce the income drastically.

In my opinion, if Hulu needs more income, they should either increase the number of advertisements in the programs or increase their fee's for showing the ads, because as many of hulu's customers would agree, the advertisements are no more of a nuisance than the ads shown on TV when the shows are played.


Joe in NJ   October 23rd, 2009 4:36 pm ET

The commercials on Hulu are no big deal to me since they only last 30 seconds. However if they are going to make people pay they need to eliminate the commercials. Regardless, they are going to lose the majority of their viewers once they start charging unless the can offer something which isn't available anywhere else.


John   October 23rd, 2009 4:39 pm ET

Hulu is a great FREE service. I can watch the shows that I do not get to see due to conflicts in schedule. I definitely would not pay for that convenience, though. There are too many free alternatives. Why would Hulu think it could charge for something that the networks themselves are not charging for? Most all major networks have the shows they broadcast available for stream already. Hulu is just another example of an entity trying to get money for something that someone else is giving away for free. The truly stupid part is, some people will probably pay for it, justifying Hulu's decision.


Zach   October 23rd, 2009 4:55 pm ET

NOOO!!! I've just recently discovered the awesomeness of hulu! If it werent free, i would have never watched the show "Community!" You're only hurting yourself by charging!! WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS TO US?!??!?!??!?!?!


ike   October 23rd, 2009 4:56 pm ET

they should keep it free, but if you don't want commercials then you have the option of paying.


Steve   October 23rd, 2009 4:56 pm ET

I guess I will be watching fewer TV shows. I have broadband and no cable (cable isn't offered). I might be willing to pay a nominal flat fee ($15 a month) if there were no commercials, but I won't pay and have commercials as well.


Kris MN   October 23rd, 2009 5:04 pm ET

Hulu charges.. I will remove my account plain and simple. The FREE aspect is what brings me to their site.

CYA –


Kris MN   October 23rd, 2009 5:08 pm ET

By the way, to add to my previous comment. Hulu wants to charge, then I suppose that would give me another reason to provide a site that is free.. I am sure there will be other sites to provide the same thing free of charge..


ken   October 23rd, 2009 5:09 pm ET

my biggest beef is where Hulu doesn't think we are capable of appreciating their service unless we pay for it. I rarely use their site but I think I am capable of appreciating the content despite my obvious lack of insight into how important Hulu is in my life.


Carl   October 23rd, 2009 5:20 pm ET

Hulu is crazy!!! why charge when you already air annoying commercials? I don't need to grow my eye lashes longer latese!!!!! anyways, hulu takes forever to air some content, so I already have an alternative that streams... sidereel.com.


Larry   October 23rd, 2009 5:25 pm ET

I killed my television over a year ago when it became noticeable that more ads had been inserted into my limited viewing time. With my extra time I rediscovered reading, dvds, and eventually hulu.com. Suddenly I no longer needed my television fix. I could watch my favorite hour show in about 45 minutes with a minimum of advertising abuse. I even started liking some of the ads I saw there as it became obvious that some of them had probably been specially made for more intelligent web users. Was it just too good to be true? If hulu.com does go subscription it will surely go the way of cable. I'm old enough to remember when the dream of cable became a reality. We were lured with the option of pay television without commercial ads. Well I think we can all see where that went. If hulu goes subscription, I'm back to hitting the books!


Vic   October 23rd, 2009 5:53 pm ET

I'd certainly pay for the service... assuming it is priced reasonably and the commercials go away.

Oh and on top of that there better be subtitles (closed captioning) for every single show that even has them. So far, really only Fox network seems to be the deaf friendly network on Hulu to provide captions for nearly every show.


John   October 23rd, 2009 6:06 pm ET

Free is very hard to monetize.

Especially when you consider all of the Fox affiliates that freely distribute all of their content over the airwaves.


Dran   October 23rd, 2009 6:18 pm ET

I think they'll re-evaluate this idea once they make the change and the Hulu user base drops to virtually nothing.


Phil W   October 23rd, 2009 6:25 pm ET

I would bet that, just like cable, the subscription will not be commercial free. Put me on the list of Hulu viewers that will find other ways to watch my shows that don't put a dime in Hulu or a networks pocket.


Daniel Roberts   October 23rd, 2009 6:25 pm ET

http://www.Fancast.com

Down with Hulu and on tp fancast.com

you are welcome everyone


Andrew   October 23rd, 2009 6:40 pm ET

One word for you NAPSTER. They were on top of the world at the height of the dot com game. I'm not saying I condone FREE or STOLEN art since I publish comics and am headed towards making films too. But sponsored commercials are good enough. NAPSTER went to a subscription service or rental thing and then came apps that "high-speed dubbed" the Mp3s but speeding them up and burning them simultaneously.

Hulu subscription = Napster = FAIL


Drew   October 23rd, 2009 7:09 pm ET

Another internet gem ruined.


Jon   October 23rd, 2009 8:06 pm ET

Cya Hulu, Hello next free online video service.


Superman   October 23rd, 2009 8:45 pm ET

I've seen so many business models try this – hulu has no clue what the web is. The reason people watch it instead of download is because it's easy. They found a perfect unobtrusive commerical interruption model that only lasts 15-30 seconds which very few people, if any, really find annoying. We respect the limited content and commerical breaks for streaming and quality. There's no way. You add more commercials and try subscription for commercialless still WILL NOT WORK – torrents will kill you and cheap free pirated online streaming will always exist. you found something that works, you're really trying to toss it out a plane onto spikes.


John   October 23rd, 2009 8:46 pm ET

I use Hulu a lot but once they start doing this ill probably go back to pirating my shows:(


Superman   October 23rd, 2009 8:53 pm ET

And we do not all have cable. many of us are dumping cable for web and downloads – everyone is saving money and cutting back, we're watching shows when we want to watch. We can get it for free from torrents illegal or not. What are they going to offer? $5,99 a month and up your content 10 times? I dare them to find a business model that works. We'll go to veoh.com, to bittorrent, to youtube, to netflix if we can wait, to dozens of other sites that stream without commercials free if we can't. Give me a break hulu. You found something that works – with commercials that people can stomach – and you're thinking about breaking it? You offer $4.99 a month and offer real on time demand of shows and quintiple your content and hope veoh and all major competitors do the same, cutout all the buffer problems – you may have a shot. But sounds like any money you make may get eaten up in doing just that. Good luck.


scott   October 23rd, 2009 8:54 pm ET

Big mistake Hulu you are going to upset the very people that made you popular you will lose your following that you made by being a free service to the
America


Bill   October 23rd, 2009 11:18 pm ET

I would consider paying a very small (i.e. less than $3.00) monthly fee to watch Hulu if, and only if, they removed the commercials. Otherwise there other alternatives.


Matthew   October 23rd, 2009 11:44 pm ET

I can't say that I would not pay a subscription fee. They would need to refresh some of their stale content more often and expand their catalog. I would expect a very nominal fee if they were going to continue ad supported content for subscribers. They need to do a better job of capitalizing on their value to advertisers. I actually watch the commercials on Hulu because: A. They are short and relatively infrequent, B. I don't have much of a choice (can't change the channel and does not make sense to flip over to check Gmail for 15 seconds) and C. If this is all I need to do (watch a 15 second commercial) for free content, I am willing to do that. If they were able to do a better job with showing advertiser value, they should not charge a fee – more eyes on content.


AaronTee   October 24th, 2009 1:47 am ET

One thing is for sure, the Hulu public relation department sucks. Letting this out without some sort of positive spin is lame. As I see it they could be successful if they strike a good balance between free and paid programming. I.e. let us pay for those missing episodes, premium movies, commercial free viewing, etc. Those who are willing to pay will, those who would never pay will still bring in ad revenue. But rather than keeping their traps shut until they come up with a good plan, they let our imaginations fear the worst. Time to fire that team.


Jason   October 24th, 2009 3:53 am ET

If Hulu starts charging people to watch the shows on there then I will be going somewhere else to watch my shows. I mean what is the point of charging people when you can go to the shows website and watch your shows there for free. The only reason I use Hulu is for the convenice.


Dan   October 24th, 2009 4:45 am ET

The current business model of Hulu is paid for by advertisers. If you're not making enough money, you need to up the price to advertise to the companies, not dig out of the pockets of those people who support you by upping your ratings. Go fee based on your viewers, I am done with you. If you're charging big bucks but wondering where the profit is, have an audit and fire the one who is embezzling your funds. I mean, come on. You set the prices to ad companies and you know your expenses ahead of time. Don't get greedy, and you won't end up needy. Meaning, the flocks you currently have will go elsewhere if you get stupid, Hulu. Don't get stupid.


Mike K   October 24th, 2009 8:25 am ET

I could see some folks paying a SMALL monthly/yearly subscription to watch HULU in High-Def WITHOUT commercials, or free with them. To try and make people pay to watch commercials will turn HULU into just another unused internet service..Napster anyone?


Charles   October 24th, 2009 9:28 am ET

If they charge a fee I will not watch.
Commercials should be enough.


Ghostbear   October 24th, 2009 9:29 am ET

I watch Hulu because I work all night and this way I can watch shows whenever I want because I am usually asleep at the times when most of these shows are on. But I will Never pay for it. I will go someplace else. If you need more money, add more commercials. If people have to pay they will switch to DVRs or Bittorrents or some other way. This is a bad idea guys, we can easily find stuff for free instead of paying for it.


John E   October 24th, 2009 10:55 am ET

I have only been to hulu a couple times. I do have to say if I was a constant watcher then I wouldn't mind paying a fee. By saying that I mean a fee or like 2 dollars a month lol. But then again youtube can be more fun to watch and it's free...


Dave V   October 24th, 2009 10:57 am ET

I would only pay if the quality and reliability was at least as good as cable or satellite, there were no commercials, I could run multiple streams, and it was less than $10.


DJ   October 24th, 2009 10:59 am ET

If they go with subscription fees, they can say goodbye to their user base. I know I'm out. I can get a better deal with cable and a dvr.


HetNet   October 24th, 2009 11:03 am ET

Yeah, if it comes down to a subscription, they may as well take the site down...
One question I'd have, though, is whether the proposed subscription would mean the end of the commercials....Anyone care to bet whether it would?

"Gimme gimme gimme gimme more more more.....


Garry   October 24th, 2009 11:36 am ET

I've used Hulu for shows that I've missed during the week.

I will not mind a SMALL non-recurring fee if and only IF the commercials are eliminated. Since the commercials are supposed to pay for the content I see no reason that they should still be there if I"M paying for the content.


Gavin   October 24th, 2009 11:38 am ET

The movies are not that great and the shows they offer are rather limited. The commercial stops are annoying. If they start charging, I will just go back to my On Demand with Comcast. I have to pay to appreciate value? I appreciate they don't charge. :)


Erin   October 24th, 2009 11:41 am ET

I get about 30% of my TV watching from Hulu, but its not important enough for me to pay for it. We still use an antennae at home and I can get by just fine without it. Its worth my time to watch the shows with commercials, but on my current budget, I can find plenty of other ways to entertain myself that I don't have to pay for.


Vincent   October 24th, 2009 11:43 am ET

As a denizen of the internet, I'm ENTITLED to FREE things whenever I want them. It's ABSURD that Hulu would try to break even, let alone run a reasonable profit. If their ad revenue isn't enough, I would rather see them FAIL than pay any sort of fee. Nevermind that I have no idea what their fee regime might be, or what the benefits of paying could be. If it's NOT FREE, I don't want it.

GIVE ME EVERYTHING ON THE INTERNET FOR FREE I DESERVE IT BLGRGHRPRGHRHLHLHLLLLL


Jason   October 24th, 2009 11:44 am ET

I would be glad to pay if it didn't have commercials. Make it easy and well-organized like iTunes and you'd have a customer!


Ben   October 24th, 2009 11:44 am ET

If Hulu starts charging, they better get rid of commercials.


YVONNE   October 24th, 2009 11:45 am ET

Will not pay for HULU it will be nice until it last I guess. I will not pay even if they take the commericals out. That's what's wrong with this country everytime something good comes along changes get made usually not for the better.


Valerie   October 24th, 2009 11:45 am ET

I am not in the habit of paying to be annoyed. The hulu business model is smart- less commercials, more watching TV. I actually watch the commercials on hulu because they're shorter, and can keep my attention because I know my program is in sight- I never did that on network TV. Seems smart now, why ostracize users with a paid subscription? If they leave the commercials in, how can they expect anyone to pay for that? I, like many other commenters here, gave up cable because you're paying for cable and then you have to see paid ads too...it's lame.


ryan   October 24th, 2009 11:45 am ET

I agree with every single person so far, but I laughed the hardest at Zach's comment. Lol


Jen   October 24th, 2009 11:46 am ET

Hulu's selection is already spotty. If I have to start paying, I'll go to iTunes.


Kari   October 24th, 2009 11:46 am ET

You can watch a great deal of the shows shown on Hulu on their respective networks' websites (NBC, for instance) – for FREE. What extra "value" does Hulu offer that makes them think that people will want to pay for it? They're competing needlessly with the networks with whom they're partnering to show their programs.

I can think of one market that might pay for the service – expats living abroad who miss watching their favorite programs. But that's a really small market.


Robert   October 24th, 2009 11:46 am ET

I absolutely love Hulu.com despite the commercials. I boast about this website often and tell all my friends about it. I currently don't have cable and have been using Hulu as a way to keep myself entertained. However if iI was charged a fee to watch I would simply make the most logical choice and purchase a cable package immediately and stop going to Hulu all together. I would then search for a new free site. Trust me if you start charging us; a new free website will emerge as the victorious competitor. You Will destroy what you have built.


Kevin   October 24th, 2009 11:46 am ET

Goodbye Hulu,

Not paying a fee. forget about it. Plus, half of the time you don't post updated shows or different episodes are missing. Not paying.


James   October 24th, 2009 11:46 am ET

Shrug. Television isn't exactly a human right. If you don't like the price, don't buy the product. That's how prices get set for everything from soup to television shows. Hulu will quickly figure out whether they can charge for content or not, and it's up to you to decide that.


Spencer   October 24th, 2009 11:47 am ET

I currently visit hulu and tolerate the commercials. Even if they charged a dollar a year subscription fee, I wouldn't pay it. I guess when your stock is under $15 you've got to find additional ways to piss off your customers. Brilliant!


Jennifer   October 24th, 2009 11:47 am ET

I will not pay to watch this either.


Rita   October 24th, 2009 11:48 am ET

Nope, I won't pay for hulu ever. I use surfthechannel which gives me a choice.. I can either watch for free, no commercials and take "breaks" or pay $19.95 per month for unlimited viewing. Either way, there are no commercials. If you go the free route, you can watch for 72 mins, then take a 54 min break, then watch another 72 mins, etc. I chose to pay the $19.95 for 3 months so I can watch unlimited and I just love it.


jerry   October 24th, 2009 11:48 am ET

ill just tivo all my show and skip the commercials


Jason   October 24th, 2009 11:48 am ET

Hulu is a decent service but not worth a monthly charge. Between the DVR I never bother setting and the Netflix streaming service that's free with my subscription I don't see any reason to pay for Hulu, and I'm sure there are a lot of people who feel the same way. I don't think Hulu will last very long if they start charging.


James Dean of North Carolina   October 24th, 2009 11:49 am ET

I love Hulu and watch everyday but the day they charge I am no longer using Hulu! If they can't make it on revenue from commercials they are doomed to fail. If they try to charge I hope they do fail and fail fast ! What is next CNN.com charging for me to use their site? Geez I already pay Time Warner 60 per month for internet.


Pascalle   October 24th, 2009 11:49 am ET

And then everyone stopped using hulu, in five years no one even knew what a hulu was anymore. The End.


Jason   October 24th, 2009 11:49 am ET

Hulu was all about convenience for me. If the model changes I will go back to the DVR and my nice television with a huge picture. I am so tired of being nickeled and dimed to death in the rest of my life, entertainment with minimual commercials was nice while it lasted.


deworde (in the UK)   October 24th, 2009 11:49 am ET

I can see them putting up a "freemium" model with no ads for subscribers, the same way Spotify do. Possibly including specialised content like DVD extras. If not, it'll just prove or disprove the dictum that charging for Internet content is difficult to do, as Hulu loses a lot of users very quickly.
Let's be honest, if it doesn't make them more money, removing the login page will not be difficult to do.

However, and this is important, if they make it subscription-based internationally, I will subscribe. I will be all over that. The ability to get US shows that aren't run in the UK for $15 a month? Yes, that's worth the money.


Nicholas   October 24th, 2009 11:49 am ET

I use hulu all the time and if they make me pay I will stop. if they set it up like others have said where a section is free but with commercials and the other payed without then that would make sense. Take pandora for example. They have the 2 differant sections and are doing just fine. hulu, don't take away my only way of watching tv.


bc   October 24th, 2009 11:49 am ET

I use Hulu all the time instead of recording shows on my media center PC. Before I discovered Hulu I recorded the shows on my PC. When the fees kick in I will kiss Hulu goodbye.


Frank   October 24th, 2009 11:51 am ET

Hopefully the networks will still have all of their shows available for free on their websites. If so, it will just mean using them rather than Hulu. Otherwise, I can always watch many of the older shows via my netflicks account.


Matt   October 24th, 2009 11:52 am ET

By the sound of it, they will have a subscription system like most other internet/stream systems, and that is a limited amount of free content, and then pay for more.


Liger   October 24th, 2009 11:53 am ET

I use Hulu because I don't have TV at home, and can't catch most of the shows I like when I am at work. My options are Hulu, or piracy. Why is Hulu pushing me toward piracy with subscription fees?

If the commercials go away and the fees are cheaper than monthly cable and a VCR from Goodwill, I'll consider it. (Limited budget woooo)


Disappointed   October 24th, 2009 11:54 am ET

It will be too bad if Hulu goes this route...especially if they keep commercials in the shows. Nevertheless, it could work well as a model if they competed on price/offerings with Apple's "Season Pass" for shows on cable, like Dexter, This American Life, etc.

The cable/dish companies should take note: Hulu's "a la carte" offerings with commercials are a no-brainer compared to paying outrageous monthly fees for channels/shows many don't bother with. Yes, DVR's are nice, but nothing beats Hulu streaming through Plex on a Mac.


Marie   October 24th, 2009 11:54 am ET

I'd pay a reasonable subscription fee; however, I'd expect no commercials and stellar content. Hulu is good – but there are other ways and places to get content with just a little effort. I'm sure there will be a lot of free tutorials posted on how to do this should everyone have to pay.


kris b   October 24th, 2009 11:55 am ET

I would never pay a fee for that bottom feeder crap they call the movies section. the only thing i watch is the documentaries and i can see them on youtube if they start charging.


Gary E.   October 24th, 2009 11:56 am ET

So it would seem that comcast , dishnetworks, directTV and others have seen the writing on the wall and quite probably made Hulu an offer they can't refuse. Big mistake Hulu...you might have given these others a run for their money. Broadband is finding it's way into places it's never been before via private wifi networks because big carriers don't think it's profitable enough. Right now it's possible in a lot of areas to secure a broadband connection for less than thirty dollars a month and completely replace your telephone service (google ooma) , subscription tv,(Hulu , Joost, ....) saving Joe Consumer $60.00 – $70.00 a month. But greed will play out against you Joe. And I am sorry for that....


James Coe   October 24th, 2009 11:57 am ET

A simple statement , if Hulu starts charging a subscription fee ,it will be the last time I go to it.That's what the commercials are for. every body starts getting greedy!


Gregg   October 24th, 2009 11:58 am ET

You people are being ridiculous. How is it 'Greed' to charge for your services!? Presumably, if you have a job, you need money to pay your bills, too. Do you think ads that no one clicks on support HD streaming of major TV programs? Really?

More disgusting is the people who justify stealing TV shows and movies because of this move. If you can't afford Hulu or movies or TV show, don't steal them...or at least don't pretend you have any justification for doing so.


bobics   October 24th, 2009 11:58 am ET

Misleading blog post title. Carey's "I think" sounds like just that... they're thinking about it.


Carl   October 24th, 2009 11:58 am ET

??? I don't have cable and rely on HULU for the shows (You don't have CSI!!!). The commercials should be enough to cover cost and earn a profit (like Facebook ads). Once HULU starts charging, the viewers will stop going there. That's a fact. So, go ahead and charge. It will surely backfire.


Gil   October 24th, 2009 12:00 pm ET

Hulu is not the Wall Street Journal. Murdoch pay attention:007 will come after you. Arrogance is what brings big business down. You will just generate the new generation of software for free.


ben   October 24th, 2009 12:01 pm ET

i agree with what most are saying here – i wont' pay hulu to watch their content. seems like the vast majority of commenters here are opposed to that model. and i would guess that many people passionate enough to comment on this topic represent the type of person that watches hulu enough to even consider paying. hulu should start charging more for commercials – a commercial spot during primetime can be very expensive, and it's primetime almost all the time on hulu. hulu should also consider creating a set-top box and profit off of that while keeping content free. i think that's something people would actually purchase.


kathismom   October 24th, 2009 12:01 pm ET

No kidding! I'm not going to pay for Hulu. The only reason I use it is so I can watch shows like Heroes, FlashForward and shows that I can/could record with my TV anyway, for me I use it strictly for the convenience of being able to watch when I want on my computer. 30 seconds of commercials compared to 3 to 5 minutes of local crap commercials?? I'll take Hulu anyday but if they charge, I go back to watching with my Dish channels, record them then watch them, I'm going to skip over all the commercials.
Hulu charges = that will be the end of them.
(although I did just have a horrible thought...what if clear channel bought them? Then I wouldn't use Hulu just on principle).


Cody   October 24th, 2009 12:04 pm ET

Most of the shows I watch on HULU are on free over the air stations anyways like Fox, NBC, ABC, CBS . .etc. So the main thing HULU has
going as far as I'm concerned is that when I miss an episode, or want to replay one I can do it there.


Patrick   October 24th, 2009 12:05 pm ET

Hulu just drilled a hole in their own ship.


gid   October 24th, 2009 12:05 pm ET

They will need to stop playing ads if they charge. Maybe they should do a mix model where some of their content (like previous seasons of a show for example) require a subscription, but the new stuff are still ad based.


LMC   October 24th, 2009 12:05 pm ET

I agree that Hulu will be cutting it's own throat by charging a subscription fee. People who can't afford cable are not going to be able to afford a subscription fee either. It's one thing if Hulu is not making enough money to keep going, but if that were true, they would be charging now. I believe this is just another greedy company and if they do charge, I sincerely hope they fail. I rarely hope for businesses to fail, but I'm so tired of all the greed!


John   October 24th, 2009 12:05 pm ET

Just like Sean suggested, I think hulu should keep both. You can choose either to pay a subscription fee for ad-free shows, or watch free shows with more commercials (say, 60 seconds).


Anon   October 24th, 2009 12:06 pm ET

I don't really dig the commercials whether on TV or online, but I'd rather see Hulu increase its commercial base than pay per view. They could easily increase revenue by doubling the commercials–just by watching two instead of one, per show break– and I think the consumer would rather see that than their dollars go to waste.


Eric of Reseda   October 24th, 2009 12:06 pm ET

Bye-bye Hulu.


Sayntin   October 24th, 2009 12:07 pm ET

Ill just go back to recording the shows I miss, I can live without HULU and I will if they start charging for free TV shows. Quit trying to use old business models with new technology, when will they learn.


sean   October 24th, 2009 12:07 pm ET

free hulu rocks pay hulu sucks


Latr Hulu   October 24th, 2009 12:08 pm ET

I really loved Hulu - I even purchased some of the wares peddled in the commercials. If they start paying for it then I will bail and go back to watching things on http://obama-epic-fail.com. At least they keep things real there and promise NEVER to charge for content.


Rusty   October 24th, 2009 12:09 pm ET

I agree with Sean and Ike. Let people pay and get commercial free programming. People that want it for free can still sit through ads (maybe more of them). I love people that grew up in a world without Tivo talking about "suffering through" commercials on Hulu. What are they, 15-30 seconds? And there's about 3-4 of them? If you don't pay for a DVR, your commercial breaks are a LOT longer than that!

But yes, if we're paying, we're not watching commercials. And for the people that dumped cable, congrats on a good financial decision. I doubt they'll be charging $75/month for Hulu. You can probably still pay.


Jason   October 24th, 2009 12:09 pm ET

I love how they say, more or less, that folks don't appreciate the value of Hulu, so they're going to get charged a fee to use. That'll show 'em!

I will certainly not pay to use Hulu. Like other commentators, I enjoy the service as it is, but the value of it is that it's free to users. Take that away, and it looses it's value.


David   October 24th, 2009 12:09 pm ET

Haha....

My guess is this is only the beginning for these types of online services. Youtube will be next...

Most of the newer tv shows that are on Hulu can be found for FREE on the big 3 (ABC, CBS, and NBC) websites. Their site is alright. They post halfway decent movies. BUT I DOUBT I WILL BE PULLING OUT MY HARD EARNED CASH TO WATCH A RERUN OF WELCOME BACK COTTER, OR SOME OTHER DUMPY SHOW!

My suggestion to all of you folks is to jump on the Crackle bandwagon.

http://www.crackle.com


Jim H, Glendale, CA   October 24th, 2009 12:09 pm ET

You can see what the problem is here. We all grew up not paying for TV. We already have to watch ads. Even PBS has to get out the begging bowl continually to make us pay. The idea that people will join hulu en masse, and pay a subscription fee, is ludicrous - particularly since they started the whole venture by not charging. That's how they got popular.

If any event of the last year has convinced me that TV is about to go the way of the music industry, this is it. Here's an idea: pay performers, producers and creative people, and let the "networks" float out to sea and sink. They're as relevant as switchboard operators. One ringy-dingy, two ringy-dingies, you're disconnected.


henry   October 24th, 2009 12:09 pm ET

this is the old bait and switch.......shame on you HULU


Don Conway   October 24th, 2009 12:09 pm ET

This is awful. Hulu was a decent service with ads because it came with a few good shows that I want to watch. If they start charging, they better have every network and show on television, or I will just bittorrent or record them myself. :(


Danny   October 24th, 2009 12:10 pm ET

According to a post on Gizmodo (http://gizmodo.com/5388745/how-a-paid-hulu-would-work) Hulu will NOT be charging a fee to watch what's currently free on their website. Just check out the article.


Charlie   October 24th, 2009 12:11 pm ET

I would never ever pay for Hula. The only reason I use it now is because its free! I dont use Hula that much anyway because I have cable and dvr. I will just use Joost until they charge. Pretty dumb move.


Tom   October 24th, 2009 12:11 pm ET

Geez, it's TV. It's not like it's actually something worthwhile.


Ryan   October 24th, 2009 12:11 pm ET

Hulu already gets paid for my viewing. It's called commercials and broadcast television has been using this monetizing model for 50 years now. This is nothing more than greed, wanting to get paid twice for their content (note: they're not going to eliminate the commercials). Very few people will be willing to pay. The vast majority will find alternatives and Hulu will die (Note: I'm an avid Hulu user and fan of the current service).


Acasa   October 24th, 2009 12:11 pm ET

And so comes the death of hulu.

TV execs are bastards.


Donna   October 24th, 2009 12:12 pm ET

Here is my suggestion to Hulu: Don't! Not just when you are starting to become a household name. If you want to make extra revenues only charge for episodes that have expired. Like someone else said there will be another start up to take up the slack from the users you will lose.


Idont Thinkso   October 24th, 2009 12:13 pm ET

see Apple's iTools free-to-paid changeover for a history lesson on how not to go from a free service to a paid service with no major change in what you get for the money. This is a bad idea, and will most likely kill hulu as a good online alternative to over-the-air television.


mike   October 24th, 2009 12:13 pm ET

Being stuck with commercials IS paying. The whole purpose of "modern" media is that of selling something, in this case advertising. Advertising value depends on circulation. The more people reached the more the advertising is worth. Look at what has happened to the nation's major newspapers; circulation crashed, advertising crashed and the biggies are gone.
So; HULU is not free; the viewers determine the value of the advertising which is what it is all about. "Appreciate" has nothing to do with this.


Jakedog   October 24th, 2009 12:13 pm ET

Big mistake. Hulu already draws revenue from advertisements. Charging people to log onto the site will cut viewership. This will be good for You Tube.


Navin   October 24th, 2009 12:13 pm ET

I will definitely not pay for Hulu. It's free on television, they already make a TON of money off the commercials, why do people try to always get rich over night? I will definitely search for an alternative.


Tom   October 24th, 2009 12:14 pm ET

Bye bye, Hulu. Hello downloading!


Patrick   October 24th, 2009 12:14 pm ET

Say bye bye to the Hulu. It was fun, but we're not paying for it. Paying for commercials? Forget about it.


John   October 24th, 2009 12:15 pm ET

I have to say that I will also likely go somewhere else. It boils down to convenience; I like the shows and not too bent out of shape about commercials. However, as some have that they do not have cable because it costs extra, I think that I will find my entertainment elsewhere. Quite a few students, particularly undergraduate and graduate use Hulu due to its current model. Charging a group of folks who are already tens of thousands of dollars in the hole is sure to send audience numbers plummeting, myself included. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.


gt   October 24th, 2009 12:16 pm ET

Well, I completely disagree that Hulu has "valuable content", their content is hardly the best of tv (look at their movie listings). My favorite show to watch on hulu is the daily show, which you can also watch on the show's site. Similar with other shows as well.

What hulu really provides is convenience so that one doesn't have to scrape the web to find streams of some popular shows. But considering that there are other alternatives to Hulu (and there will be more) this is hardly a service I would want to pay for.

I don't believe the Hulu people have lost their mind and want to ruin their business by attempting a move that will alienate all of its customer base. But they must be struggling with their current business model so they may not have a choice.

For one thing, online video ads do not have the same impact as tv ads. Furthermore, they always have technical difficulties with ads, as many of them do not load (I usually just get a message and have to wait for a 30s countdown).

I would encourage them to rethink their advertisement model, explore new online advertising methods, but charging for content will not work, guaranteed.


Jim   October 24th, 2009 12:16 pm ET

Another case of Corporate Greed Mongers running the show when they know the least about it. Oh well this Hulu BooBoo with just make room for someone else to fill the nitch. I will never pay for content that includes advertising of ANY sort.

What idiots!


Danny   October 24th, 2009 12:17 pm ET

Here's a better article explaining the whole Hulu situation.

http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20091023/how-much-will-you-have-to-pay-for-hulu-nothing-how-much-will-you-pay-for-hulu-plus-good-question/


Ethan   October 24th, 2009 12:17 pm ET

I definitely agree with the majority of people. I will be very upset to see HULU start charging for its service. For my part, I do not feel like paying for DVR, and most of the shows that I like come on when it is inconvenient for me to watch. The ONLY advantage that HULU has at this point is that it is free. If they start charging I am quite sure it will snowball rather quickly. People do not want to pay for something that was free first.


Bob   October 24th, 2009 12:18 pm ET

If they start charging, I'm gone.


Tom   October 24th, 2009 12:19 pm ET

take the commercial content out of the shows, then lets talk. that was the original premise of cable back in the stone ages and we see how long that lasted.
pay to watch commercials both online AND in cable? Dont think so.

Hulu does this and they wont be around long at all.

But hey, if the board wants out and wants to shoot themselves in the foot, who are we as the public to stop em?

Let em, maybe the collective human gene pool IQ will go up a point or 2


Allen   October 24th, 2009 12:19 pm ET

RIP Arrested Development (2003-2006)

One of the best TV comedies ever produced...


Casey Wilson   October 24th, 2009 12:19 pm ET

I have high speed internet, and I do not have any form of cable TV. I use Hulu often. And I will *not* be paying for it.


mick   October 24th, 2009 12:19 pm ET

If I pay for a show then why not download it from itunes. A subscription charge. Forget it. I'll just miss the show. I already have to pay by watching commercials.


dewda   October 24th, 2009 12:20 pm ET

Too bad for HULU. Between cable fees, internet fees, telephone, and over priced movie tickets, this is the last straw. The idea of watching those stupid commercials and paying for it, is just to much. Goodbye HULU.


Dane   October 24th, 2009 12:20 pm ET

There isn't a chance in Hades I would pay for Hulu.


Mike   October 24th, 2009 12:21 pm ET

With Comcast buying up NBC Universal expect hulu to die and your government doesn't understand technology enough to see this is a monopolistic position. Expect all cables, with their massive cash machines, to lobby to have Bittorrents outlawed also. As they grow in content ownership (think TWC) they will have greater say in establishing copyright ownership and shutting down torrents.

NOTHING COMES FOR FREE BOYS AND GIRLS


Wayne Messer   October 24th, 2009 12:21 pm ET

Hulu corporate morons are idiots. They get paid advertisement for programs for the most part are FREE in the first place the only difference is you can watch it at your convenience.

I hope all of those of us who have support Hulu and spread how great it WAS to others stop watching it immediately when they try and make you pay a subscription.

I guess they are using the Gordon Gekko approach "Greed is good"

Let's unite to show them what happens when you get to greedy.


mojo willaker   October 24th, 2009 12:21 pm ET

so they want me to pay for something they already give away for free over the air?

are the owners of hulu investing in torrent sites? cause thats where everyone will go to get their shows now.


Motero77   October 24th, 2009 12:22 pm ET

I can watch most of my shows on ABC.com or NBC.com. I don't need hulu to keep up with my shows and I don't have TV or cable just internet. I am a poor college student, the last thing I'm going to do is pay for one more thing when I can get it for free.


E-double   October 24th, 2009 12:23 pm ET

Bye bye Hulu! I'll miss you! :-( We had some good times together....good times. (But not good enough for me to pay to keep you)


amber   October 24th, 2009 12:23 pm ET

I would be willing to pay to use Hulu if shows went live the same night/next day they air. It would also depend on how much more new content they bring in. I don't have time to watch TV live, so this would work much better for me. I'm also assuming it'll be a decent price with no ads.


Stephanie   October 24th, 2009 12:23 pm ET

Pfft... nah. It's too easy to find the shows elsewhere for free. I do love the site but I'm not paying for it.

All about greed nowadays.


aj   October 24th, 2009 12:23 pm ET

I think HULU is doing a publicity stunt to make themselves visible to out-reach to more potential customers...... Why would a company running farily stable shun themselves by putting in a rule which would kill their business. In few days they will revert their decision back to not charge their customers. I didn't know or heard of HULU until I saw this blog in CNN. Now I did, that's itself is a simple example what I am trying to say.....


Joseph Marcs   October 24th, 2009 12:24 pm ET

Sad, Bye Bye Hulu!


Therev   October 24th, 2009 12:25 pm ET

Can anyone say bittorrent?


Ash Leighe   October 24th, 2009 12:25 pm ET

I used Hulu mainly to watch Modern Family but I also watch other shows and events. If they start charging a subscription fee, bye bye Hulu! I can live with it or without it.


Larry   October 24th, 2009 12:26 pm ET

Ha, cya Hulu. Back to Tivo.


hu   October 24th, 2009 12:26 pm ET

HULU NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I searched and searched and finally found you perfect and free. I dont mind the commercials only 30 seconds but to make us pay for you! NO! I can just record. It only takes a little more time so can like half the people who watch this. NOBoDY likes this idea you get enough money from commercials you cant excatly spend it on anything you are just a website. No one will pay for you and you will lose.

Or you good do something like if you pay you get no commercials that way would be fair.


Andrew   October 24th, 2009 12:27 pm ET

Bad move Hulu. People use your service two ways: in conjunction with their existing cable, or, as an alternative to the high prices of cable.

So, congrats, you have managed to alienate both groups. The first one is already paying for cable and being one of them, I can tell you there is no way I'm going to shell out more cash for Hulu.

And in the second case, those people went to Hulu to escape the cost and annoyance of cable. By charging for the service, you are destroying the one reason everyone uses your service in the first place!

Doesn't really matter though, as Hulu dies, 10 others will step up to take it's place almost immediately. Some already exist, though they are admittedly not as good.


JohnB   October 24th, 2009 12:29 pm ET

Cable dumping sounds like a trend that is why HULU is probably charging. What TV cable company is hulu in bed with? Millions of people not paying for cable and watching it for free online is a big hurt to cable companies and they need to get that market back. There just going at it the wrong way.


Vince   October 24th, 2009 12:29 pm ET

Yeppers, Hulu dies if it goes to a pay model. Stick with the ads, we will stick with you. Make us pay, and torrents win the day...


Tim   October 24th, 2009 12:30 pm ET

This is going to drive people back to Bittorrent...


Mike   October 24th, 2009 12:30 pm ET

They should do a two tier approach. If you pay there are no commercials at all in the shows and if you don't pay then you have commercials. If you pay and have commercials then I will just turn my cable back on.


Ryan   October 24th, 2009 12:30 pm ET

Rupert Murdoch announced earlier this year that he plans on converting most of his free websites (his news sites, hulu, certain features of myspace, etc) to paid services within the next few years.

I personally can't wait for him to do so. He's so out of touch and set in his old ways of doing business. I can't wait to see him fall flat on his face. :-)


Mary   October 24th, 2009 12:31 pm ET

Paying for HULU? No way! I have the same shows on cable that I ALREADY pay for. Hulu is just a good way to catch up when I miss an episode. Bye-bye Hulu.


brian   October 24th, 2009 12:33 pm ET

isn't that what iTunes is for???


PresentTense   October 24th, 2009 12:33 pm ET

My initial response to this story was that there was no way I would ever pay their fee for Hulu. And it's not that I'm not willing to pay something, but for the value I get for Hulu I'm not willing to pay much. I have cable, but I essentially use Hulu as a DVR – for example, House and Heroes share a time slot, so I can watch one live and the other on Hulu.

Would I pay to keep this ability? Maybe, but it's not going to be anywhere in the neighborhood of what they'll ask. They're going to set it to at least $20 a year, and likely leave the ads in place. No way.


Terry Mills   October 24th, 2009 12:34 pm ET

No pay, no way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Jay   October 24th, 2009 12:34 pm ET

They will tank and we will will loose what is right now a great service. I will not and I am sure most others who use it now will not pay a fee. The whole value of the service is that it is free. They will loose most people if they start charging, especially if they keep commercials and charge fees. I pay for satelite, I like to use the service when I am away from home. If I am forced to pay for it, I will just find alternative sources and rely more on my dvr more.


Darin B   October 24th, 2009 12:34 pm ET

Paying and still getting brain numbing commercials?
Some how television that was always free has become pay,
Cable tv used to have a basic broadcast free service, then when the twin towers went down the cable industry saw it as a reason to charge by bundling in what we don't want in order to charge a basic fee.
this country not a democracy it is a Corporatocracy.
If Hulu Charges I'm out.


Rebecca   October 24th, 2009 12:35 pm ET

wow.. really, I wouldn't want to pay a penny for hulu. Hulu is great but I can find so many other sources to watch pratically any shows I want anytime. And if that other source starts charging...well, then I just move on to another source! However, Hulu was so convenient!


Bram   October 24th, 2009 12:36 pm ET

Nope. Would not pay. I visit every so often when I forget to set my DVR or my comp with a built in TV tuner. Not sure why HULU feels a need to charge when they are already getting revenue like regular TV from sponsors. The thing is. not many or their movies etc... even pass muster for me. These are shows that are otherwise FREE on the airwaves correct?

But watch some will start paying for it for the carry and go aspect on portable comps however I hear XM and Sirius in the background with their struggle to keep up paid radio subscription.

If HULU thinks adding Stern or Oprah will impress me it will only convince me never to visit the site again.


steve   October 24th, 2009 12:36 pm ET

Hulu is in a serious fantasy land if they think anyone will pay for their content. That is what their advertisers are there for. We'll endure the commercials but you're saying that you want us to pay to watch and have to watch the commercials that your advertisers are paying to insert. What brain dead morons are running this company. Goodbye Hulu... I wouldn't pay 99 cents a month.


Rich   October 24th, 2009 12:37 pm ET

If they start charging, Boxee is going to be huge. Boxee already does a better job displaying the media you want to view.


amer   October 24th, 2009 12:38 pm ET

Lets be honest here... I'm too one of the people who will not pay to get TV with commercials anymore... But if the price is reasonable, I will think about it. An example of a reasonable price is $1 a month. That's fair enough and and they should remember they didn't get that dollar before. So I think if I'm one of the executives I will try to establish a plan where I work around a very low subscription by allowing people to appreciate the service and at the same time help keeping it a live by a very low subscription like a $1 a month.

Otherwise, I have to admit that I will be the first to go. I learned about hulu when they didn't have such thing as 480/320 quality video. But I don't care, if they challenge us with pricing, I will be the first to fly..


JeLisa   October 24th, 2009 12:39 pm ET

Bye bye, Hulu.

Was nice while it lasted.


Nicole Schrier   October 24th, 2009 12:39 pm ET

I will also stop using Hulu. I have no cable at home, but I do have Netflix. If Hulu charges, I will just wait until the seasons of the shows become available on Netflix.

Let's also not forget that most of what Hulu has available is also available on the network website, although it is typically not as good of quality.

Why pay for Hulu to watch an ABC show, when I can just watch it on ABC.com?


Kel   October 24th, 2009 12:41 pm ET

Wow. That's a really bad idea. It's not like there aren't plenty of other sites where you can view tv shows for free. I guarentee you, most people will find an alternative that's free, and Hulu's popularity will decrease by at least tenfold. Think about if Facebook or Twitter made you pay a fee? Most people would stop using it, even if they liked it a lot.


ryan   October 24th, 2009 12:41 pm ET

"I'm waving goodbye to Hulu when they say they should charge money for their services. Greed is not cool."

That's just a ridiculous statement. Tell us the services you use on a daily basis that are free.


Kms   October 24th, 2009 12:41 pm ET

I agree with Larry. If Hulu starts charging, I'm outta there.


fs   October 24th, 2009 12:42 pm ET

HAHAHHAHA ! Good luck with that. If they really need to go to a subscription model to stay profitable, I wish them all luck and hope they have come up with plans on what to do when Hulu folds.


ab   October 24th, 2009 12:43 pm ET

Buh-bye Hulu. Leave the free content game to the show creators, like AMC and FOX, who are smart enough to provide episodes of wonderful shows like House and Mad Men to increase viewer loyalty. With episodes, "inside stories," blogs and chat, there's real community building going on that only drives more viewers to the show. Middle men like HULU we don't need!


Alicia   October 24th, 2009 12:43 pm ET

I too love hulu and introduced it to my friends who don't watch tv because they can't see having cable. Like them Im on the go but love to the ability to watch my favorite shows on my on schedule. It is free and I will not pay for it once they start charging. Why mess up a good thing. I will find another outlet once they start charging and so will many others. Until then I will use it because it is great.


Brian   October 24th, 2009 12:44 pm ET

I've loved Hulu for a year, but I'm not going to wait. I think I'll try and see how well I get along without them now. I just need to bookmark a handfull of sites to replace them: ABC, NBC, FOX, sidereel , etc.


B   October 24th, 2009 12:44 pm ET

Really stupid move. Finally, there was a way to watch or re-watch content for free – legally – and now they're going to drive people away. They already have advertising – deal with monetary issues there. I hate that many current shows only have limited numbers of episodes available (more the networks' restrictions than Hulu's I think) but I've been able to catch up on some things I never had time to watch before, and that's the part I love. Really stupid move, Hulu, because many will not pay. Get ready to watch your site traffic drop dramatically.


Average Dude   October 24th, 2009 12:47 pm ET

Greedy bastards! They surely won't be getting any money from me.


comicblues   October 24th, 2009 12:48 pm ET

What on offense. I will be looking for free alternatives today!


rebecca   October 24th, 2009 12:48 pm ET

i've liked hulu and have tolerated the 10 minute commericals about nuva-ring. i'd never pay though. seems pretty egotistical to charge for network tv shows. there's veoh, the network sites, or regular old-school tv – or if you want convenience, people have tivo. go ahead and charge for movies – be a competitor of netflix or something.


Thaddeus   October 24th, 2009 12:52 pm ET

During times of vast unemployment and economy hardships, why does the corporate board running Hulu think it is wise to start charging for content. If greed is what thereafter, I will not hesitate to look elsewhere for free content like most intelligent people.


Luz   October 24th, 2009 12:52 pm ET

"...what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value..." So let me understand... in order for consumers to appreciate the value of the service, the executives want the consumers to pay! We already pay when we watch the commercials. Well... let's watch the executives impose a fee and then watch how their fans disappear!


Barry Black   October 24th, 2009 12:53 pm ET

The days of totally free internet are numbered. Already several media outlets charge a modest fee. I remember the early days of "Pay TV" when everybody would say why would I pay for something I get for free and look what happened! As long as the subscription fee comes with improved programming--no problem.


Kassia   October 24th, 2009 12:53 pm ET

Sean had a good idea. Keep the service with commercials for free, but have the option to pay a subscription fee if you want to watch shows without commercials. Everyone wins and they don't lose most of their viewers.

No one I know will pay to watch on hulu when people have been watching these same shows for free elsewhere. They will be upset because they will have to search for it, but when its the option in this economy for free or pay, they will choose free every time.


Vash   October 24th, 2009 12:53 pm ET

It's sad because my parents have done the same as most people and ditched cable tv for an HDTV with pc hook up and utilize the awesomeness of HULU and Netflix. Cable companies are getting away with murder now a days with their prices. I work for Wal-Mart in the electronics department and educate my customers constantly on the use of their HDTV purchase and the great Idea of using the PC connection. Appreciate content? You mean to tell me the only way I can appreciate CONTENT is to see a dead guy tell me about an apoxy that can pull a truck or the 50 million herpe's commercials?


Jeremy   October 24th, 2009 12:53 pm ET

CNN.com tried this a few years back, charging subscription fees to watch streaming video. How well did that work out?


David   October 24th, 2009 12:54 pm ET

The only reason I use Hulu is because its free. I don't mind commercials, I know they have to make money someway but now they're getting greedy.


Katie   October 24th, 2009 12:55 pm ET

Why would someone pay for Hulu when they can stream the same shows online on the show's network site?! This is the most ridiculous thing ever. Really the only "service" Hulu provides is collecting all the shows from all the networks in one place. No more Hulu simple means you'll have to load Fox, ABX and NBC's webpages, instead of just Hulu. Big Deal.


Debbie   October 24th, 2009 12:55 pm ET

Hulu gets more then half its content from other sources. You can get things like the "Daily Show" from their own, respective, web sites. ie: Fox, WB, SyFy etc. Forget the middle man if they are going to charge for others content.


joker42   October 24th, 2009 12:57 pm ET

On well it was nice while it lasted I'm sure another site will pop up to take its place. Its sad though, originally tv was free and that's why we had commercials then cable came along and we were not supposed to have ads because we were paying a fee. I think these guys think adding a fee makes everything better. If this train of thought continues we will see a new golden age of piracy


Stephanie   October 24th, 2009 12:58 pm ET

BAD business move... listen to your viewers Hulu.


Diane Cayton-Hakey   October 24th, 2009 12:59 pm ET

Bye Bye, Hulu... see ya around because I won't pay and neither will many others. I can just as easily go to the networks' websites and watch most of this stuff for free. DUH.


Jen   October 24th, 2009 1:00 pm ET

What the heck. Does hulu not understand that you can watch the same shows on the network sites fo free anyway? The only thing they do is consolidate it into one place. Peace out hulu


Brad   October 24th, 2009 1:00 pm ET

Love free Hulu, wont pay. Ever.


Mark C   October 24th, 2009 1:01 pm ET

*** I love it when a company thinks they need even MORE money to be sucessful ****

Well considering that they are currently losing money, quite obviously they do need "even MORE money to be successful," genius.


Mark C   October 24th, 2009 1:01 pm ET

*** Free is very hard to monetize. ***

Tell that to Google.


Brian   October 24th, 2009 1:02 pm ET

I always thought that Hulu was a step in the right direction by both neworks and show creators alike to bridge the gap between the downloaders and the money hungry television executives.

By charging for this site they will be proving the points of downloading public.

If I pay for cable and miss a show because I am working, why should I have to pay for it again to watch it? This is an insult to all the people who support good entertainment and the decision makers will be ashamed of themselves once they realize that nobody will pay to watch TV with commercials.

Well...at least we won't pay twice.


King Marco   October 24th, 2009 1:05 pm ET

If Hulu starts charging, I will buy them from iTunes instead.Simple as that.


Michael   October 24th, 2009 1:05 pm ET

They also need to realize many of the biggest shows they offer are available free elsewhere. In particular the fox shows I watch, I already watch at fox's website. I could see them offering a premium service along with a free service. The free service exists as it does now. The pay service would let you watch programming commercial free along with the downloading of episodes and movies. But honestly in the reality of the internet I don't think they can make it work. Offering an online service you charge for means it needs to be better than everything else. And the internet is the ultimate find a product that's better and cheaper (free) tool.


James in Oregon   October 24th, 2009 1:06 pm ET

The move is response to help Hulu protect itself. Hulu's parent company is being threatened by Comcast. Comcast is interested in acquiring Hulu's parent company- which would probably mean the end of Hulu all together. Comcast sees Hulu as a threat to its business. I, for one, will pay for Hulu. It will be cheaper than paying for the outrageous rates that the cable companies charge.

We do not know what the fee for Hulu will be, but think of the alternative before you make a snap judgement about their motives.


Andy   October 24th, 2009 1:08 pm ET

I already pay for broadband, and watch the content on Hulu with commercials. So now they expect me to pay in a third fashion for the same content? Come on. It is this sort of usurious attitude that led so many people to download these shows illegally in the past.

I for one will _not_ pay Hulu, especially for content with commercials in it. I would simply record shows I can't be present for on first run, and cut Hulu out. There, no extra money for anyone!


john   October 24th, 2009 1:09 pm ET

I discovered the joys of free online things in 1997 with the mp3 and moved on to just about everything else. I've since grown up and started actually purchasing dvd's and music. I however have never owned a tv I never saw the need to purchase cable and then watch a bunch of commercials. Should hulu start charging and still making you watch commercials I will not ever return to the site. However if they offer a commercial free service with a small monthly fee I could see myself doing that.


I'd pay a small fee   October 24th, 2009 1:10 pm ET

I got rid of my cable because it costs over $100 but I must keep broadband.

I thought I'd watch almost no TV online but with Hulu and Netflix, I watch a lot more TV than I ever did cable. The recommendations are addictive, you can sample shows, timing is less relevant than Tivo. There is pressure to watch some shows before they expire. The commercials are no worse than fast forwarding on the cable companies DVR.

At $15 (equal to my Netflix plan), I'd pay for Hulu and be $90 better off than Comcast o' suckiness. At more than that, I'd just stick to Netflix. They still have a few movies I haven't seen and a couple of TV shows from the 90s. :-)

Did somebody say phone at home? Why would anyone do that? I dumped Vonage a couple of years ago because even that feels old and useless. With Google Voice, I think even more people will dump phone over wire.


James   October 24th, 2009 1:10 pm ET

Goodbye Hulu, You were sweet while you lasted, but I'd just as soon go the way of netflix, thousands of shows for one monthly low price, c'mon, not that hard to decide whice company to stick with.


Joey   October 24th, 2009 1:15 pm ET

I can live without Hulu.


Lena   October 24th, 2009 1:16 pm ET

As someone who is getting ready to enter the television industry, I'm willing to pay for Hulu.

TV is having a hard time, guys. DVRs, torrents, streaming content are all driving down ratings and thus driving down the money broadcasters get from advertisements. And they can barely make any money off of internet ads.

We don't pay for network TV, nor does the government (as opposed to Britain where there is a television tax). Shows cost a LOT to produce, like 2-4 million dollars an episode. That money has to come from somewhere, and for a long time that's been advertising. But with people streaming shows online and fast forwarding through commercials, that source of income is in danger.

I guess my point is if you like your television shows, you should support the producers and stations by actually tuning in on your TV or buying DVDs or, yes, paying subscription fees that hopefully won't be too high. Otherwise, get ready for an increase in reality TV programs.

This isn't about the greed of the industry, its about the fact that we live in a capitalistic society. In some way you have to pay for the products you get, otherwise businesses can't last. We don't have an innate right to content that costs millions of dollars and hours of time to produce.

Hopefully the broadcasters will balance the subscription fees out by, in return, providing more content on Hulu (previous seasons, all of the current season, etc). Then it could be a cheaper alternative to buying episodes on iTunes.


EM   October 24th, 2009 1:17 pm ET

I love Hulu. I use it to keep me occupied on continuous feed of my favorite shows when I want to escape the world for a couple of hours. A fee will certainly remove any hype Hulu presently has and deter viewers from using the site. It would be very distructive to the appeal it has for its viewers. They would resort to those network sites where the shows are offered free of cost. So I suggest if it is trying to raise money find other means.


paul   October 24th, 2009 1:17 pm ET

People in this country have an over developed sense of self-entitlement.


sarah   October 24th, 2009 1:18 pm ET

If hulu starts charging, then I'm going elsewhere!


Sarah   October 24th, 2009 1:18 pm ET

I don't pay for cable because I know I can get it for free online. Just as I wouldn't start paying for Hulu when I can use Fancast for free.


Matt   October 24th, 2009 1:18 pm ET

Hulu will have to make a choice... in-show commercials OR a paid subscription service. Consumers will not tolerate both. It's that simple. My guess is that they will attempt to preserve both of their revenue streams.


Dylan   October 24th, 2009 1:20 pm ET

The only reason I use Hulu is because it's free and everything is located in one place. If video quality was better, I'd consider paying. I can just as easily torrent shows though...


LEO   October 24th, 2009 1:21 pm ET

I don't understand why a company decides to broadcast some shows for free and all of the sudden when they realized how many people turn to free TV , they feel that it is money they are losing. or the other companies think their business is threaten.
Well, I guess until someone else comes out with some free TV again, most people will go ahead with their regular TV schedules and forget HULU ever existed.
Why pay for something most of us are already paying for (cable or sattelite).


Kevin   October 24th, 2009 1:21 pm ET

Chase Carey's statement about making people pay so that they appreciate the value of HULU's content shows just how warped corporate thinking is. Perhaps, HULU will appreciate the value of their viewers when they exit en masse. Everything now seemingly has a renewal cost or subscription fee. I've yet to hear why TiVo needs a monthly subscription fee of $12.99. For less then $75 you can turn your computer into a DVR and not have to pay for whatever "service" TiVo supposedly provides. In fact doing so offers many advantages over a TiVo box. Furthermore, I don't remember anyone paying monthly for the privilege to program their VCR to record a set channel at a set time. It's pure greed and now HULU has discovered that greed is the best business model of all.


Ron   October 24th, 2009 1:21 pm ET

Who's running Hulu? Has Obama taken that over too?


Meghan   October 24th, 2009 1:23 pm ET

Why does it have to once again be the little guy making the big guys richer instead of just jacking up prices for the advertising? They get big time companies like McDonalds (who take up an entire weekend of advertising that they are NOT showing ads) who can absorb the cost.

On that note, if the subscription fee was modest I would probably pay it. It gives viewers leverage if they become actual "customers" of Hulu, and there are a LOT of things I dislike about it that I now just say "Eh, it's free". They would not be able to charge anything exorbitant because they cannot guarantee the quality or availability of their content.


Jen   October 24th, 2009 1:23 pm ET

I don't have cable and won't anytime soon. I only watch network shows on Hulu to better fit my schedule (I don't mind the commercials), but if they start charging I will never use Hulu again; I will just have to watch these shows when they are broadcast, like I did before Hulu.


Cheryl   October 24th, 2009 1:23 pm ET

I think Hulu needs to define the "value of our content". They air shows from other networks (CBS, NBC, ABC, etc..). It seems they are really asking us to pay HULU to appreicate the value of content on ABC, NBC, ABC, etc... I do appreciate their value - that's why I will be streaming their shows direct from their websites. It will be a cold day in you-know-where before I give one dime of my hard earned money to HULU.


Rob   October 24th, 2009 1:24 pm ET

NBC.com, ABC.com, CBS.com, Fox.com, etc. etc. offer their shows and series online for "FREE".

Hulu will be 'shooting' itself in foot (or head) if they try to suddenly start charging for content w/COMMERCIALS?

That's been done to death by Cable-Moguls who have even stacked the programming deck so that you can't get any 'single' package that has premium/ppv's all in one-package for under $100.+ dollars a month, PLUS "franchise-fees" whatever the hell that is?

So just like the auto-industry Hulu will run itself out-of-business and then ask the Govt. to 'bail' them out cause they mis-managed their company and tried to 'screw-the-pooch' (public) yet again.

It's cheaper to get DVD Mailers/Instant Play movie-content from Netflix that the Cable-creeps and now, apparently, Hulu!

Hell NO I won't pay!


Jeff Dowder   October 24th, 2009 1:26 pm ET

Smart move by Hulu...I'll certainly be signing up!


Kim   October 24th, 2009 1:26 pm ET

...I watch Hulu when I miss my favorite shows... but if I research they have encor presentations on other cable channels... I pay way too much for cable to pay for Hulu too. cable expenses are RIDICULOUS!! ...although I enjoy the convenience and limited commercials... I don't think I'd pay for it...


Mel   October 24th, 2009 1:28 pm ET

Goodbye Hulu. It was fun while it lasted.


Sean   October 24th, 2009 1:28 pm ET

Hulu is a great service to use while traveling, but if they begin to charge a fee, I will just wait until I get home and watch it on the DVR.


David F   October 24th, 2009 1:30 pm ET

yup, I've already stopped watching hulu as much as I used to because of the new volume of commercials, if they start charging then I'll never charge again.


Felicia   October 24th, 2009 1:34 pm ET

Bye Hulu, it's been fun.

I had tons of free ways to watch my TV shows online before you came along and I'll still have tons left after you start charging everyone.


Sriti Kumar   October 24th, 2009 1:35 pm ET

No No ... that should not happen. I was so happy with NO CABLE and ONLY HULU... I loved Hulu Labs and their recommendation system. I find ads sometimes annoying but I can sit through 4 mins of ads to see my shows in HD quality. Hope hulu people find some alternative. I hope fancast does do not in near future.


Kida   October 24th, 2009 1:36 pm ET

Suck it, Hulu. BitTorrent, here I come.


veggiedude   October 24th, 2009 1:37 pm ET

When Hulu first appeared, I wondered for about 10 seconds if it might help kill iTunes store. Then I realised it wouldn't work, they will have to start charging for the service, as soon as it got popular.


Robyn   October 24th, 2009 1:37 pm ET

If hulu does start charging, other websites will spring up offering the same service for free. Those nice advertising dollars will just go elsewhere once the viewers leave hulu. The viewers leave, the advertisers will too.


Steve   October 24th, 2009 1:38 pm ET

I use Veoh to watch non-mainstream content.


Devyn   October 24th, 2009 1:39 pm ET

I love Hulu, but will not pay for it. For on-demand streaming, there are other free choices. For the most part I'll just go back to downloading torrents of all the programming that only Hulu had.

Now, if Hulu would reverse their decision to block mobile devices, and I could watch Hulu on my phone with Skyfire again.... then they might snag me as a subscriber. Maybe.


Burnie Hall   October 24th, 2009 1:41 pm ET

A far better idea is a two tier model, subscription fees for no commercials, or free distribution with commercials. Hulu and the networks would make more money and alienate less viewers this way.Even though I have satellite tv I watch hulu 80% of the time because it's convenient to my schedule. Will I pay for that service? NO! I could download the shows with slightly more effort and have no commercials through bit torrent. Even better, I will learn to use my dvr more effectively. In no way will I pay for a service I've used for free for the past 18 months. Bye Bye revenue stream from advertising payable to hulu by inserting commercials if they go to fee based model.


Glenn M (Aliquippa PA)   October 24th, 2009 1:41 pm ET

hulu is a great convenience. I don't have time to watch television during the week. On demand from Comcast is too thin on content and clunky. The variety of bad delivery sites owned by the networks is annoying.

Would I pay? Only for things I really want to see. And I'd likely pay for them on iTunes where I can replay them if I want.

I'd suggest the board do a little more thinking about how to monetize hulu. They are acting like there are only two choices.

Get creative, people.


Scott R.   October 24th, 2009 1:42 pm ET

This is completely out of proportion. Hulu is looking to charge for premium (cable, film) content possibly, and nothing else. They followed the comment by saying "We continue to believe that the ad-supported free service is the one that resonates with the largest group of users and any possible new business models would serve to complement our existing offering.," because there's about a zero percent chance that they would try charging for content that's still free on their owner network's individual sites.


Beverly   October 24th, 2009 1:44 pm ET

I use it some time when I miss a show or forget to DVR it. But I think paying is a big no no for me, I don't pay for I tunes video so no way for Hulu.


Swerds   October 24th, 2009 1:47 pm ET

The only way I would pay for Hulu is if it meant no commercials. None at the begining, no commercial breaks, none tacked onto the end of the shows. And as Vic stated, commercial captions need to be available. Not deaf, but just hard of hearing enough to make it difficult to catch the words at times.


Matt   October 24th, 2009 1:50 pm ET

Ooh, look – there's an open space on my quick links toolbar where Hulu used to be.


Ron   October 24th, 2009 1:51 pm ET

Just dropped it from my browser favorites list. Not really that good!


Appreciation for Value....LOL   October 24th, 2009 1:52 pm ET

I propose an appreciation for our value as consumers by not frequenting the product once they start putting up their toll booth. Bye, bye, Mr. Carey. I'm already going back to peer-to-peer to get my shows. I don't need you anymore.


M.   October 24th, 2009 1:55 pm ET

If I can't find it on Hulu, I go find it on one of the streaming video providers that are everywhere. Charging for Hulu may get people who don't know any better, but everything is out there for the viewing if you know where to go.


Katie   October 24th, 2009 1:57 pm ET

I love Hulu. I've told all my friends about it, and we're all loyal viewers. But if Hulu starts charging, there is no way I will pay. I already pay for Netflix, and if it comes down to a showdown Hulu will lose. Netflix offers a lot more shows online. Sure they may not all be the same, but they cover a broader range of cable TV. Plus they have a lot better movies available for instant watch.

Besides, most of the networks also offer their shows for free onine. Why in the world would I pay for Hulu?

Even if I wasn't somehow able to watch a show online later, I'm pretty sure my life won't end if I miss an episode or two. Sayonara Hulu.


Lee   October 24th, 2009 1:58 pm ET

Hulu was great because it was free. If they were to start charging, they would definitely need to expand their show library, offer no commercials and the fee would have to be nominal.


John   October 24th, 2009 1:58 pm ET

"I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value." Are you kidding me?! Do you really think that consumers are going to pay for a decent (at best) stream of a show that aired a week ago, AND sit through the same commercial five times during that show? I pay to stream movies on Netflix – commercial-free...I gave up cable because I was paying an inflated price to watch a few shows WITH bloated commercials. I won't pay for Hulu. If you charge, then ciao, have a short life!


ACE   October 24th, 2009 1:58 pm ET

Even if they give the option of free and subscription the free content will be the Three Stooges and the pay content will be last nights episode of The Office. They will always find a way to screw us so that we have to pay to watch what they know we really want to watch. It'll be interesting to see if hulu is still going strong by the end of next year. I seem to remember something called Napster that started charging, remember mo' money mo' problems.


Carol Wright   October 24th, 2009 1:59 pm ET

There is probably a price point arrangement that might work. Like $20 year Bonus Hulu to have access to vaulted programs, but otherwise free. Perhaps they should charge more for the ads. It obviously makes sense that the advertising base will shrink considerably if they charge subscription. However, we're all getting rather spoiled, aren't we? Some comedian was on TV commenting on this. For instance, suddenly we get free WiFi on an airplane flight and accept it with smug "about time." Heck, ten years ago, who would have thought it possible.

I remember doing an interview with a musician many years ago, and he told me about this thing you could do over bulletin boards. A group could upload a recording of their new tune OVERNIGHT to a BB, and it would be available for the world to hear, if they wanted to spend hours downloading it, that is. "One day, you'll see, we'll be able to shop for music on our computers, and buy our music from a virtual store anywhere in the world. And we'll be able to share pictures too!" NO WAY! And here we are all whining that we can't get HIGH DEF VIDEO of our favorite programs on demand for free any more. Spoiled.


kara   October 24th, 2009 2:00 pm ET

This would be awful! Just add more commercials! I don't watch hulu because it offers limited commercials, I watch hulu because I can't afford cable right now! And when I have had cable, I can't always see the shows I want to. HULU PAY ATTENTION TO YOUR FANS! WE APPRECIATE YOU – DONT MAKE US PAY. I WILL LEAVE.


Martin   October 24th, 2009 2:00 pm ET

One of my classmates in graduate school began working for Hulu when it first started and she convinced me to check out the site. Since then, I have been a huge fan, often times catching up on television shows I've missed for lack of owning Tivo. I will say this, I will stop using Hulu and move on to any of the other free online services I turn to to watch films released just the day before. News Corp. Deputy Chairman Chase Carey said, "I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value." How is paying for a commercial-filled service going to make us appreciate the value? Is he out of his mind? The unfortunate part of this is that I never knew News Corp. owned Hulu. Had I known that, I would have done what I did to my Myspace account when they purchased it...cancel my account.


p40   October 24th, 2009 2:03 pm ET

I use hulu everyday ... I mean I don't mind the commercials; I thought they were making money already! Greedy people! Yes I doubt I pay more $5 per month ... netflix offer free streaming & 2 DVDs per month for 4.99 but what I understand is that their streaming videos are very limited.

I'm assuming that networks will still show their tv shows online for free with commercials, even if Hulu charges.

bye bye hulu.


Dryw   October 24th, 2009 2:04 pm ET

Why would I pay for Hulu? I can find most of the shows I want to watch on the network websites – Hulu just makes it easier because it is all in one place. Charging for their services would simply make me add bookmarks for my favorite shows to my web browser and then delete Hulu desktop. Do they not understand how the internet works? Free (with commercials) is what sells and you better have something much more impressive than a bundle of programs I can find elsewhere if you are going to charge me for it.


Christopher   October 24th, 2009 2:05 pm ET

A reasonable subscription fee hulu – without commercials – would i imagine beat buying a Season Pass to Family Guy on iTunes.


Pablo   October 24th, 2009 2:06 pm ET

I haven't had a cable subscription in years–I just have an internet connection and I used to pirate everything. I like Hulu, as a free ad-supported service. I hardly pirate anymore, it's just too much of a hassle compared to Hulu and my iTunes-connected Apple TV. I would likely pay for a Hulu subscription service except for one thing: their willful stubbornness in not allowing any devices connected to an actual television screen to access their content (eg: boxee).

I currently own an Apple TV, on which I pay money for favourite shows that I think are worth watching on the large 60-inch HDTV in my living room. I use Hulu on my computer for shows like the Daily Show, which is not particularly worth a big screen, really; or for new-show discovery. Oftentimes I'll watch a first and second episode of a new show on Hulu and I will then buy a season on iTunes, for watching on my large TV.

If Hulu offered a paid model, and they also let me watch on my TV (be it via an agreement with Xbox, Roku, Apple, or whatever), I would pay it in a heartbeat. Otherwise, FOAD, networks, you're just trying to squeeze me for my money without any real value. Back to the torrents I go. What a shame.


lespaul77   October 24th, 2009 2:07 pm ET

if anybody wanted to pay for hulu there wouldn't be an itunes, amazon, bit torrent, not to mention every major network already streams their own content, good luck with that genius business strategy


Stephanie   October 24th, 2009 2:07 pm ET

Anything you can watch on Hulu, you can watch on ABC or CBS.com etc for free. Them charging is pure greed.


amok5555@hotmail.net   October 24th, 2009 2:08 pm ET

Remember "PayPals" old Slogan......?

"PayPal....Always Free"


Liir   October 24th, 2009 2:09 pm ET

LOL ... Read the article again, Seth. Hulu does not want more money, they want you to "appreciate the value of [their] content." See? This is all really just for your own good! XD


remington   October 24th, 2009 2:09 pm ET

I have recently found an alternative to hulu, a site run bu AT&T that brodcasts major net works just as well as hulu for free~

http://entertainment.att.net/tv

they dont have fox on board ...yet, so I still will be using hulu to watch family guy...until they start charging.


Scott   October 24th, 2009 2:10 pm ET

Greed continues to drive the good things about America into the ground. It permeates throughout society.


Jeff   October 24th, 2009 2:10 pm ET

I guarantee if they stop paying, they will keep both revenue streams (individual user and advertising). The commercials will stay, you will pay, and the CEO's get another chalet in Aspen and another private jet.


Karcutski   October 24th, 2009 2:10 pm ET

Who the heck do they think they are? If Hulu starts charging the solution is simple. All of their best content is already free at the NBC, ABC, FOX, and Comedy Central websites. Do they honestly think we won't just go watch our shows there? Maybe they know that this non-gratis business model will fail but think that if they start charging for something that has no monetary value, essentially behave like Wall Street, that they'll be eligible for a federal bailout and get our money that way.


Jeff   October 24th, 2009 2:10 pm ET

Sorry I meant if you start paying. Sorry about that.


Jerry Hess   October 24th, 2009 2:13 pm ET

Yea this should drive down there traffic enough to make them only come up when someone is bitching about having to pay.... Bye Hulu


Jason   October 24th, 2009 2:14 pm ET

It's back to downloading then...


Maci   October 24th, 2009 2:14 pm ET

I really think this sucks. Wow.
It's really sad because we already have netflix.
Hulu, I thought your main page said "TV Shows, Movies, and more, all for free!!" What happened to that??????? On to something else....... No one is going to pay for that!!!!! We are already paying for tivo, so......
forget it. you won't make much money, hulu.


Bk   October 24th, 2009 2:15 pm ET

Bye bye Hulu! Watch your customer base disappear....myself included. I don't use it enough to justify paying for the service. Bad move...oh what could have been...


Patrick   October 24th, 2009 2:19 pm ET

Well, it was nice while it lasted, guess it's back to bittorrents and other outlets for free media. Bye Hulu, unfortunately for them I don't believe their profit from the few people willing to subscribe will make up for the lost ad revenue from all the people who enjoy it for it's free service. Considering a large portion of their audience probably consists of minors who usually do not have credit cards and are fully aware of bittorrents, they will see a loss of revenue through this action. Either they will reverse the action of this misguided venture, or they will become completely unprofitable and disappear.


John   October 24th, 2009 2:19 pm ET

If you look at the quote, it says that a subscription plan is only PART of the business model.

More than likely, they are looking at a subscription-based premium version of the service. If this is like other fee-based services online, then it would probably encompass things like a commercial-free, higher-quality stream, possibly with earlier availability of programming.

When you think about it, that's smart business. Those who wish to bypass commercials can pay, however anyone can view the content for free.


Bob Lafayette VT   October 24th, 2009 2:19 pm ET

“I think a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content. I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value."

If not the single most self serving and undermining statement in alignment with a fee program, certaintly comes on the heels in terms of impact as the "modernization" of napster <-- Still Breathing.

Perhaps its better written like this:

Don't pay for television! Who would want to! Come here under this tent, out from the rain. Yes, its nice here isnt it? No longer will you have to pay those bad men at cable co or sateillite inc.... enjoying your stay? splendid! nice and warm? comfortable? perrrrfect. Now even though millions of you have come to us, we don't think you VALUE the service. a better way to make you VALUE us, is for you pay oh, just 19.99 a month dear friends. This way, even if you dn't value us, you will BRING a VALUE to us :) ..


David   October 24th, 2009 2:20 pm ET

Ha Ha... No, Thank you Hulu.com.


James   October 24th, 2009 2:21 pm ET

A few dollars a year for something we enjoy, that's communist!!! This is America goshdarnit, and it is our constitutional right to steal something instead of paying for it!!!


Ron   October 24th, 2009 2:21 pm ET

I can't think of a better way to piss off more people in a bad economy!


Rob   October 24th, 2009 2:23 pm ET

Bye Hulu - loved it while it lasted – if I am going to pay for content, I will only buy from iTunes.


Louis   October 24th, 2009 2:23 pm ET

I have used Hulu in the past and while there were some shows or movies that I watched, the content available on Hulu is not worth paying to access. There are many free alternatives to Hulu that I will use instead.


Greg   October 24th, 2009 2:24 pm ET

I think it's amusing that people want everything for FREE! I guess that's why they're called "USERS".


nosegrot   October 24th, 2009 2:24 pm ET

I'm paying for internet so HULU isn't free, now they want to charge me more? Snot happening!


Thomas   October 24th, 2009 2:24 pm ET

If I have to pay I will go back to cable which is more reliable. Between the commercials and the interruptions that happen when watching programs on hulu, NO, I WON'T Pay to watch HULU.

They do not even carry all of the programs that I want to watch and there is usually a delay in putting programs on when they are available on CBS or the other networks.

With cable you have a lot more programming that is not on HULU.

Don't be GREEDY


Jerry   October 24th, 2009 2:25 pm ET

The only reason I use Hulu over cable is because Hulu doesn't cost anything. I stopped downloading T.V. shows after I found this site but now I'm going right back. There will be a site just like Hulu that will pop up after they start charging and they will lose all the money they currently make. Bad move.


Jim   October 24th, 2009 2:27 pm ET

Free is a nice gesture – but never pays the bills.

If you get value, you should return value, and money does that for companies. But, it has to be worth it – equitable.

For me, I'd like to pay at most $4.95 a month with commercials, $9.95 without commercials – and on a monthly basis so I can suspend my account during months my shows are not on.

And, any amount per show won't cut it. Makes me not want to watch. Let me pay a little bit and max out my value once inside to feel its worth it.


Tim   October 24th, 2009 2:27 pm ET

Hell no that i will pay. Imaging what happens to Google if they start charging for using their search engine. ZERO ads revenue. Zero customer (maybe).


Matt   October 24th, 2009 2:27 pm ET

If Hulu really wants people to pay for content that they have been receiving for free, it's going to have to seriously up its game.

For instance, there should be no ads under any circumstances. They should also keep more than the standard five most recent episodes for all shows, especially the popular ones like The Office, Family Guy and Glee. At the very least they should keep the entire current season. Also, the catalog of shows should continue to grow. The goal should be nothing short of including every show currently on TV, plus all the past ones (I Love Lucy, Gulligan's Island, etc.)

I also feel like they should come out with some sort of Apple TV style box to help less tech-savvy people watch Hulu stuff on their televisions. Even if they had to be purchase they'd probably tap into DVR sales and be quite popular.

Of course, it's highly doubtful ANY of this will happen. Still, it's nice to have a dream...


Rick C.   October 24th, 2009 2:28 pm ET

Hulu, listen good. You charge, you loose a viewer.


ds   October 24th, 2009 2:28 pm ET

hopefully they will take a play from Pandora Radio. a small fee for enhanced service but free for the majority. i'd pay a small fee if it meant I had access to every episode of a tv series but definitely not if they continue to only offer the most recently aired episodes.


Mike   October 24th, 2009 2:31 pm ET

No way no how will I use Hulu again if they start charging! I was just talking to someone the other day about how great Hulu was and how their model could be an indication of the future for on-demand entertainment...guess that wasn't true


Ammon   October 24th, 2009 2:31 pm ET

For those of you that consider a split option Hulu (that is, a Hulu with a paid-commercial free option), consider too that moves like that often precede a model of exclusivity. Imagine, non paid users will get a stripped down tease, while the paid users get the latest episodes and the better rated movies all to themselves. They could even ramp up the amount of commercials for free users, again to frustrate them into buying in to a subscription fee. It's a system that works well enough to have fostered shareware and ad-supported versions of software and websites like Gamespot that used to offer an ad free site to those willing to pay, and block high definition videos to those that did not.

Hulu could take this route, which is manipulative, sure, but also unfortunately effective. Supporting a split on plans like this supports a fee, and Hulu's magic is that it doesn't charge it's viewers.


LeFiffre   October 24th, 2009 2:33 pm ET

Sorry, John. Free is very easy to monetize. Here's how, and why Hulu shouldn't take its viewers for granted.

As content providers, Hulu is in a very strong position to woo advertisers because it can monitor and report to them EXACTLY how many people viewed a commercial, when they saw it, what their demographic was, and they can do this in real time - broadcast and cable TV can't do that. Not even close. (They make quarterly guesses based on Nielsens, etc.)

In addition, Hulu provides instant click-through to advertisers websites, a convenience I've used to learn more about products that interest me. Since Hulu can measure these click-throughs, it can provide advertisers instant feedback on the effectiveness and immediacy of their expensive commercials. Hulu is a media-buyer's dream! (See the future, anyone?)

Because only Hulu can quantify and qualify the audiences advertisers want, only Hulu can guarantee the value it provides, and that's strong medicine in this economy. Of course this is a two-edged sword, because if we're not watching, Hulu's stuck reporting that, too. D'oh!

Guess what, Hulu - you need us more than we need you.

My historic loyalty and willingness to watch your commercials should be enough. So don't get greedy, big shots. If you charge I'll leave - and blog about your monumental misstep.


Gianni   October 24th, 2009 2:33 pm ET

See Ya later HULU.
I deal with the commercials that they GET PAID for running.

Smooth move while we are in a Depression....
I already pay for the web.

If I didn't they couldn't show me the commercials.

Typical greed.......


Mitch Weaver   October 24th, 2009 2:33 pm ET

Good god, so is this being discussed as a way to ensure profitability? You'd think that it was built into the business model, especially with as much money as they threw at advertising this year. So either they're a bunch of greedy bastards, or they're making bids on more "premium" programming and trying to stay profitable. I'm guessing the former. I'm guessing the finally multiplied the number of unique users by a subscription fee and the result made their eyes light up with big dollar signs.


dmt   October 24th, 2009 2:33 pm ET

I hulu while I work (home-based web development business). Thankfully, we are working, watching and discussing shows all the time. We've even come to enjoy the ads. I'm sure you get lots of $$ for advertising. You sell eyeballs to advertisers and you have many..... But I guess that's not enough. Greed will chase me and many others away from you. Subscription fees – bad idea.


Zachs   October 24th, 2009 2:34 pm ET

Disappointed. Hulu is a great aggregator of online content and has made it easy to watch shows and catch up on an episode that you may have missed when it aired.

I have been a big proponent for Hulu and have really spread the word. A subscription service for online content that is already provided by the content owners for free does not seem to make sense and I certainly will not pitch in and pay for it. Too bad really since I thought Hulu had managed to charge effectively for its advertising to make it profitable – but I guess that have grown with the use of Venture Capital and Angel Investor financing and the returns may not be as high as they had originally anticipated. This drive for short-term profitability and growth is a big reason that many great start-ups fail after a successful entry.

I am interested to hear more about the details of the subscription service to see if makes any sense at all, but with a pay-for-use model I am not convinced that they will survive this strategic decision.

Hulu might be better off trying to work out a deal with work movie houses to sell online content (similar to Apple store downloads) and additional programming services that go above and beyond the content that is already free and which they aggregate on their site. This way Hulu leverages the established base it has already brought it and provides extra content that these customers might value enough to purchase.Hulu – think of what additional value you can add that customers really want and keep your base model as is in order to establish that trust with your customers.


Scott   October 24th, 2009 2:34 pm ET

Good luck w/the fee Hulu....I'll be downloading elsewhere. Note that when I watch on Hulu, I have to watch the commercials...if I DVR, I bypass the commercials. If I download, there are no commercials...


Jim Coyle   October 24th, 2009 2:35 pm ET

Classic double-speak. They just want another opportunity to make money.


Jason   October 24th, 2009 2:36 pm ET

Won't pay if there are commercials...

Man I guess none of you EVER go to the movie theater any more... Every darn one of them show commercials at the beginning now. Quite annoying. But if you want the big screen experience, there isn't much option.

Jason


James   October 24th, 2009 2:36 pm ET

Ever since Hulu started disappearing episodes of shows I was watching (one day you're watching a show and it's gone the next day when you try to finish watching) I've no longer thought of them to be a stable source for entertainment. This has happened to me at least twice with Hulu in the last month.


Bobby D   October 24th, 2009 2:38 pm ET

Some of you people crack me up. You have said you drop paying for cable to get hulu for free then when hulu says they are going to start charging you are trying to call them greedy. LMAO You want something for nothing not them. I prolly wont pay for hulu either but calling them greedy is a little hypocritical. I pretty sure it isnt free to run this site.


patsycat   October 24th, 2009 2:38 pm ET

I'm curious about how their relationship will change with the video distributors. If I can watch the Daily Show free on Comedy Central, but watch for a fee on Hulu ... why would the Daily Show provide the programming to Hulu without getting a cut? How about PBS programming, which has just finally this year found its way online in a big way? It's actually taken a long time to get online video to this point in distribution ... and I still think it's a long way from a workable business model.


Ryan   October 24th, 2009 2:40 pm ET

I definitely won't be paying a subscription either. Free alternatives will win.


Patrick   October 24th, 2009 2:41 pm ET

I use Hulu a lot now. Definitely won't pay for it. Charging a fee will be their death knell.


Ted   October 24th, 2009 2:43 pm ET

I would pay if they dropped the commercials. You can't have your cake and eat it too.


Jesse   October 24th, 2009 2:43 pm ET

This is one of the worst ideas ever. They are going to loose so much traffic.


tcarrell   October 24th, 2009 2:45 pm ET

Here is my counter offer, and by the way, it won't get any better than this.

Keep the free subscription model and at the same time, escort Mr. Carey off the property – bag and baggage.


Matthew   October 24th, 2009 2:46 pm ET

I'll add my name to the list that will no longer use Hulu if they charge.

I love the site and the freedom to watch on my time, but I'll go back to the free alternatives when that day comes.


K. Rooney   October 24th, 2009 2:46 pm ET

I imagine commercials would be removed from the programming(at least initially) but my prediction is that we will witness the downfall of Hulu over the next 24 months. Look what happened to all of those free music download sites in the late 90's! Is anyone still using Napster now that they have to pay for it? And yes, I know downloading music for free is not quite the same thing because it's stealing the livelyhood of the aritist that created the music but we as viewers are not the direct source of funding for the Broadcast networks programming. That falls to the Advertizers who pay BIG BUCKS to the broadcast networks in hopes that consumers will see their products during their programs, then go out and buy said products! Ahh the circle of life. The point is, HULU, if you want more money, run more commercials! Let those bloated corporations flip the bill!


Nate   October 24th, 2009 2:46 pm ET

NOOOOOOOOO! *Sigh* Another one bites the dust. . .


JZ   October 24th, 2009 2:48 pm ET

I just discovered Hulu – and I think its awesome. But, I really don't think that I'll pay for content – I already pay for broadband and cable. Sadly.


Andy   October 24th, 2009 2:49 pm ET

Horrible idea hulu has. I can justify spending a little money for something I own, or take with me. Just when I thought the news mediums were being cool, they go and begin their decent into a slippery slope.


Heath   October 24th, 2009 2:49 pm ET

Someone will surely now start a competing free website that will replace them. They have already proven that you can make money via the model. Get greedy, get replaced.


Andrew   October 24th, 2009 2:52 pm ET

If this happens, then its back to torrents for me. I will not pay for something that I'm getting now for free. Greed is not cool.


Joe   October 24th, 2009 2:53 pm ET

Hulu is going to charge for their services, which is their right. However Hulu told the public, "[Hulu] think[s] what [they] need to do is deliver [their] content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value."

I am assured the public already greatly appreciate the value of their service. Why can't they just say we think we can generate more profits from the consumers. That way they do not compound their greed with equivocation. I appreciate honesty and the assumption the general public isn't ignorant to the general process of business.


Steph   October 24th, 2009 2:53 pm ET

I will be a broken record and repeat what many (if not all) of the previous posters have said: I won't be paying for Hulu. I watch it often, not everyday mind you, but often enough to bemoan the fact that they are weighing the option of making it a pay service. While I don't think making it a paying subscription service will completely ruin Hulu I DO think they underestimate their popularity if they think that enough of their current clientele will pay for the service to make it profitable. Especially if all they are offering is online streaming. I don't believe that there are enough people with enough want of watching cable shows and movies online who would pay for the service for them to make a profit. Most people have not ditched their cable service to stand wholly behind online video watching and the people who have will surely just find another route, legal or otherwise, to get their TV fix. So thank's for the memories Hulu...it's been fun!


Gadi Hyer   October 24th, 2009 2:54 pm ET

My girlfriend and I watch everything and anything on Hulu. What attracted us is the whole concept of not having to pay double for both TV and cable and just watch all the good shows like 'House', 'Fringe' and others, not to mention the plethora of movies that they have. We even use Hulu to entertain the kids. If Hulu starts charging, everyone and anyone will drop them like a bad habit. Its a shame that something like greed has to get in the way of just good entertainment. Bye Bye, Hulu. is was awesome while it lasted. :(


Rob   October 24th, 2009 2:54 pm ET

Had to be NewsCorp/Fox/Rupert Murdoch that suggested this. Shocker.

Hulu, as it stands right now, is the internet equivalent of free, over-the-air broadcast TV. If they start charging, it better be commercial-free and around 10 bucks a month. Pretty much a model identical to Netflix's Watch Now. Otherwise they can kiss me and a gazillion other viewers goodbye.


Christopher   October 24th, 2009 2:54 pm ET

I've only recently taken to Hulu – just to watch SyFy Channel's "Stargate Universe." I'm doing it on Hulu because my computer is portable and because my wife gets crabbby whenever I watch science fiction or sports on the tv. When Hulu goes to pay-to-play I'll just use my DVR more.


Mary   October 24th, 2009 2:58 pm ET

They should pay us to watch it. Too many ads. Too little broadband available across the nation. Supply and demand? Who do they think they are that they have the corner on the market for entertainment. They only gets greedier. Move over Hulu. Someone will take your place.


matt   October 24th, 2009 2:58 pm ET

later hulu....What a joke paying for commercials!!??!!


Dave   October 24th, 2009 3:01 pm ET

If Hulu goes pay, it will die. I turn to it instead of illegal downloads because I'm willing to give the networks support for creating the shows I enjoy. But I won't pay for it. I doubt anybody will. Not when you have netflix, which while not as current, offers many many more choices, and allows you to have DVDs sent to your house as well as online streaming. And DVR/Tivo where you can just set it to record the shows you want to watch. And has all the other benefits, such as pausing/rewinding live TV. And it works when the internet is down.

Hulu offers very little that is worth paying for when we already have legal alternatives, and the illegal alternatives are generally easier, and higher quality (Hulu doesn't even offer 720p !).


Wytze van der Veer   October 24th, 2009 3:01 pm ET

I think Hulu does not get the point.
I use Hulu almost every day. But the shows I watch are by FOX, ABC ,etc. Hulu is just a mail service getting those bits to me, It is not their content. If i can get it free somewhere else, (like a torrent) why would I pay for it. Except for the annoying Hulu logo they don't add anything to the content.

Hulu is convenient, and being free is part of that. When they charge, I will be like totally gone!


ChuckD   October 24th, 2009 3:03 pm ET

Ha ha, that last one is funny! Both funny "ha ha" and funny "interesting" because I tried to watch a season 2 episode of Arrested Development only to find that season 2 and 3 are now nixed from even Hulu. Now what do I do? Netflix it is, I guess. Interesting to see who will win between Netflix (kinda sorta already has a paywall for its streaming video) and Hulu.


Joseph   October 24th, 2009 3:04 pm ET

all I have to say is that HULU then lost thier minds what makes them think that we were watching them for we excused the commercial for knowing that we could get to watch our most favorite TV Shows thats why I have stayed away from cable but if paying becomes the case i am going to cable by HULU I guess in order to enjoy everything you have to be dimed for it thats to bad.


Kevin   October 24th, 2009 3:06 pm ET

I will not pay for hulu especially since they will most likely still play ads


Scott   October 24th, 2009 3:07 pm ET

Well if they are changing me and forcing me to watch AD's. I'm GONE. Not going ot watch something with AD's in it that I'm paying for. I don't WANT to pay for AD's that are a waist of my TIME. If you want to offer me AD free for a FEE based subscription I'd probably be interested.


Aku   October 24th, 2009 3:10 pm ET

Well, it was nice while it lasted. The Hulu people need to realize that people used the service BECAUSE IT WAS FREE. Now that they'll be charging, people will just go back to what they did before. >__>


Matt   October 24th, 2009 3:10 pm ET

What "value"?

All of the good content on Hulu is available for free on all of the major network sites.

Basically, they'll charging for a crappy selection of old movies that most critics panned.

If I have to pay, I'll just end up going back to Netflix where they have a pretty good selection of streaming films and television shows.


George   October 24th, 2009 3:11 pm ET

The people who work for HuLu better start looking for a new employer.


amber   October 24th, 2009 3:14 pm ET

i completely agree w/the article! love hulu but wouldn't pay for it...........


orangecrate   October 24th, 2009 3:14 pm ET

if they go pay they have lost me to i don't mind the 30 sec comm
if they go pay better drop comm.


david sharpe   October 24th, 2009 3:15 pm ET

Bye Bye HULU!! Won't pay for it!!!!


Tesla Boy   October 24th, 2009 3:16 pm ET

Hulu produces nothing original. It just re-plays work that was paid for in its first go 'round. Then it lamely adds more ads to a small screen version . It's like a bar trying to charge others for the pee I left there last night. It may still have some kick left in it, but the cost of verification of same far exceeds any potential benefit.

They probably had to include this phase in the initial business plan to obtain start-up capital. What this really says is their operation is failing to meet expectations and they need a new revenue source to continue. The commercial insertion is a technical and sales failure.

All the other video aggregators will benefit from Hulu's demise. Competitor cross-linking with them has set the stage for a simple audience shift once they fold. Taken together, they've shot themselves now in both feet.


tiffanie   October 24th, 2009 3:17 pm ET

I use hulu because I prefer their streaming quality over the players on most of the network sites. There is no way that I will PAY to use it though!


Wil   October 24th, 2009 3:17 pm ET

I could see a $15-20 a year thing, anything more than that, and I'm out. My big beef is that the good shows come out 8 days later, not cool.


NBonapart   October 24th, 2009 3:18 pm ET

I for one relay on Hulu for my TV and movies just because they are FREE. If they change I guess I will just stop watching these shows altogether. SAD...I really did love Hulu and even offered to let my scholars at school watch it on their free time...Disappointing HULU...very disappointing. : – (


Bill   October 24th, 2009 3:19 pm ET

This is just why I dumped cable 4 years ago. Why would I pay to watch commercials? This would be a stunningly stupid move if they decided to go ahead with it. But, like someone mentioned above, it's really no big deal...there will be something even better coming around the corner...time to move on...it was good while it lasted.


Oscar   October 24th, 2009 3:19 pm ET

"... a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content."
Don't they realize that the ONLY reason they have so many viewers is 'cause it is free. TV execs are brain dead.

C-ya, Hulu. I won't pay, I'll just watch less TV.


Tom   October 24th, 2009 3:21 pm ET

Just another case of a corporate executive not understaning the era in which he is doing business. Hulu is convenient, but by no means necessary. They have decent content, but the content is delayed and their movie selection is horrible. If they begin to charge for this service, I give them a year tops before they rethink their business plan.


Dan C   October 24th, 2009 3:22 pm ET

I have broadband but don't have cable because all the additional channels show the same episode 20 times during the week. I use Hulu to catch up on my staple shows, but I won't if they start charging. I do have Netflix already so I can either wait for the season to come out on DVD or just go directly to the Network websites to catch up on the shows for free. I can't believ they think people will actually pay for it when they are already getting revenue from the sponsors and advertisements. So long Hulu, it's been nice knowing ya!


jeff   October 24th, 2009 3:22 pm ET

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA.......funniest idea ive heard in months!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Hula Hoop   October 24th, 2009 3:25 pm ET

....gone the way of the Hula Hoop.......................although, the hoop is making a come back thanks to Mrs. O


Richard Hernandez   October 24th, 2009 3:25 pm ET

Ridiculous! I will NOT pay for something I get on TV for free ONLINE. It seems in these troubling times, money talks, people walk. I can only imagine Youtube following suit in the near future as well. Shame.


James Dee   October 24th, 2009 3:30 pm ET

Back to torrents


Adam   October 24th, 2009 3:30 pm ET

This is a clear case of greed. No mention of "fallen profits," just a need for an "evolving business model." Translation: corporations can't keep their hands off of anything these days.

If Hulu charges but continues to keep advertising and does not stock more than 5 episodes for currently-running shows, they will fail. Just like Napster's original model fell, just like every other good idea falls to corporate greed. God bless capitalism, right?


Kev   October 24th, 2009 3:31 pm ET

I'd pay if they open it up to international users. As it is now hulu is useless if you don't live in the states and if by paying I could watch the content then I'm all for it. If however they say my money isn't good enough well screw that.


Hd   October 24th, 2009 3:33 pm ET

Ditto. I love Hulu. I will not pay for it.


John Kantor   October 24th, 2009 3:35 pm ET

I'd pay a lot if they promise to destroy every episode of Family Guy ever made.


Aaron   October 24th, 2009 3:37 pm ET

Farewell Hulu! Were the advertisement dollars were not enough? Streaming old content and charging a subscription is absurd. Another reason Rupert Murdoch is a blowhard.


Tyler   October 24th, 2009 3:38 pm ET

No way man. I will never watch Hulu again if this goes through.


CaptNemo   October 24th, 2009 3:38 pm ET

Says Hulu mismanagement: "Hey, we'll hookem with freebies, then charge 'em to watch. They're hooked. They'll still come".

General Public Response: "Ehhhh... No we won't. We'll continue to get it for free... Only now, it'll be bootleg from another location. It all views the same".

Good luck with that...


Lynn   October 24th, 2009 3:40 pm ET

Seems to me the only way to turn a buck on this proposed model is to have original or exclusive content. Even if they did I would still have no interest in a subscription service and clearly I'm not alone. I'll be sad to see it go.


Danny   October 24th, 2009 3:42 pm ET

I actually wouldn't mind paying. It's not a big deal, I'd rather pay a Hulu subscription fee and watch the things I want to watch rather than pay $70+ a month for cable or satellite packages. *cough* Comcast *cough*. Enough said.


El Mobre   October 24th, 2009 3:43 pm ET

I'll pay for the service.
HAHAHA JK!!!
I love Hulu, but not THAT much.


Sid   October 24th, 2009 3:44 pm ET

Hulu is famous for FREE, but with short commercials RIGHT? Just get more advertising, ask to watch the commercials before viewing the shows and get more viewers there fore atracting more income by advertising... out doo cable and keep it free FREE FREE FREE

Or charge and be another ustobe on the WEB and be the laughing frenzy when other fast FREE sites start popping up all over...


Terry   October 24th, 2009 3:45 pm ET

Bye Hulu.

I won't pay for your service (or any other). You get advertising dollars and you make WAY more than enough money.


Georgia   October 24th, 2009 3:46 pm ET

The only reason I pay for cable is for my elderly mother. When she is gone it will be cancelled. Most days of the week there is very little worth watching. I love to read. I would rather read than eat.

I started using hulu to watch two shows that I enjoy. I can watch them in my room in peace and quite. But these two shows are the only ones that interest me. Otherwise, hulu is the same vast wasteland as cable tv.

So go ahead hulu. Start charging. I won't miss you.


Pruitt Holcombe   October 24th, 2009 3:46 pm ET

Nope, not gonna pay. I love watching shows on Hulu, as many of them aren't on TV frequently, some are not on at all. If I miss a show, I can watch it there. But I won't pay for it. That's just stupid. I can just wait until it comes on again or shows up on YouTube.


Jose Kuhn   October 24th, 2009 3:46 pm ET

Some of you guys are total morons. If the content authors are not paid for their work, where will the content come from???

The reality is that old business model does not work. With the very transparent analytics of the web, advertisers will finally realize that they have been overpaying the major networks for years.

As a result of this online time shifted society in five years things will be very different


Mike Cratty   October 24th, 2009 3:47 pm ET

I have been watching online shows for over 4 years starting with JOOST, then NBC.COM AND ALL THE OTHERS INCLUDING ABC.COM
TV.COM IS FREE!

ABC had the first hd broadcasts years ago and all these sites still provide all prime time programs for free!

So the brain dead idea of charging for the otherwise free available content on other sites is dead in the water or Hulu will be sold off for very little soon.

CHECK OUT JOOST ITS BEEN AROUND FOR YEARS AND IS THE BEST ALTERNATIVE TO HULU along with tv.com cbs/abc/fox/nbc AND ALL THE OTHER MAJOR BRODCASTERS!

The reasons why the commercials are in these programs is so the Hulu website can make a profit, well guess what, they are greedy in thought and will be looking for other jobs soon if they decide on this policy change!


Kirt   October 24th, 2009 3:48 pm ET

There have been other websites that have tried this and all have failed miseralbly. Why would HULU think there any different is beyond me.


Ris   October 24th, 2009 3:50 pm ET

ha ha ..this will be the dumb move, i wonder why hulu is making a hole in its own ship..weird..


Rick Hunter   October 24th, 2009 3:50 pm ET

so many other alternatives. HULU does not have the content to attrack anyone to pay for a membership. WHAT A SHAME.
R.I.P. Hulu :(


Zack   October 24th, 2009 3:50 pm ET

Think about it. Were ads ever really a superb thing on the web? Commercials from a internet browser are MUCH less effective, compared to the ones on a television. Its so easy to switch to another tab/window while a commercial is on. So its probably ok to assume that Web Commercials are not worth as much.

Sure, you can change the channel on the TV, but you have no idea when the commercial will be over, and you do not want to miss your show.

Hulu is pretty popular now. Its easy to use compared to the other "alternatives" (torrents, etc). People that cry "Greed", somewhat hypocritical, isn't it?


Love TV   October 24th, 2009 3:51 pm ET

Moreover HULU is not fast.


Tim   October 24th, 2009 3:52 pm ET

I'm definitely not paying for Hulu. Fancast, Veoh, etc. here I come.


Mike   October 24th, 2009 3:59 pm ET

Well It looks like I'll be watching my shows elsewhere. Pay for Hulu? LOL!! It's nice to not have to find the torrent in a pinch, but to pay for that? I don't think so.


john chriton   October 24th, 2009 4:02 pm ET

All the tv shows have their own website that u can go to and watch the latest episodes, lot of the times theyll have old eps to watch as well. On top of that, the shows look better on them than they do on hulu. If movies our your thing and u wanna pay, Netflix rules for that. But if its tv shows than Im gonna stick watching to them on the show's website. I havent been to hulus site in a while. no need to with the tv shows streaming sites, some in HD. Megavideo did that, I wonder did it really work for them? Maybe in another country but not here Im sure.:)


Art   October 24th, 2009 4:05 pm ET

This trend of charging for things that used to be free has got to stop. There's only one reason it happens..pure greed. I surely won't be bothering with Hulu.


Jerry   October 24th, 2009 4:06 pm ET

Well as usual when you think you are getting something that is a real good deal, then slam greed kicks in and now Hulu wants to charge a subscription fee. No way will I pay for this when you can get the same service somwhere else. They are not the only game in town.


Brian King   October 24th, 2009 4:12 pm ET

Hulu already charges me by wasting my time watching commercials. If they think anybody is going to pay for this mediocre service they are dreaming. Here is a tip, when the commercials come on put on your mute button and open up a game of solitaire until it’s over.


Kenneth Olsen   October 24th, 2009 4:17 pm ET

I love Hulu as is in fact I dumped cable for it, they make this change I will then dump them. THE CONTENT SIMPLY IS NOT WORTH PAYING FOR!


Karyn   October 24th, 2009 4:18 pm ET

I have told everyone about hulu.com since I started watching it. It's been great to be able to watch it. I filed bankruptcy and my cable station (directtv) cut me off even though I was still paying them. Then they went into my checking account and took money that was not owed to them. I will never go back to cable and found that this was great. I have watched things here I would have never otherwise. In course of two days I watched all the back episodes of "Damages". It was great. I won't pay to watch this. I am using my converter boxes for television. I won't pay for this because I can watch abc, nbc, and cbs and there is enough on it to keep me watching. Besides that, I surf the net and read and I don't really have to watch a lot of TV anyway. It's such a big waste of time and I find that life is so much more interesting without being glued to a television.


Russ   October 24th, 2009 4:20 pm ET

We are cancelling our cable service and going to hulu. We watch only a handful of shows and normally watch them a few days later anyways. Depending on the price structure – $9.95 for a year, 1.95 a month or something like that would be an acceptable charge. Anything more and we would change our minds.


Jan   October 24th, 2009 4:24 pm ET

I could see a $5/month with no ads and the show is available at the same time it is aired without delays and a much deeper content list on popular shows that don't have the full series online.

But even then, they are trying to fight the consumer instead of embracing the consumer's new behavior.


David   October 24th, 2009 4:26 pm ET

A nice mix of free content such as network television with commercials and premium content such as simultaneous access (same day as broadcast) along with a much better movie selection with new releases would be well worth a basic pay. I am paying for Pandora and feel like i am getting my money worth. Hulu does the same it would be worth the value.


Tim   October 24th, 2009 4:29 pm ET

Guess if they charge I'm gone. I'll just goto NBC,CBS,SciFi and get it for free. It was nice to have them all in the same website, but I'm not paying for that.


Abdi Ali   October 24th, 2009 4:32 pm ET

I think charging fees to view some programs on hulu , will result a nagitive outcome. Since it was paid pit its programs by commercail money it not proper thing to say " Hey, we need you pay our other expences".


Neil   October 24th, 2009 4:33 pm ET

Over the past year, what I don't download I watch on Hulu, and refuse to watch a network anymore. Another service will come along and dance on Hulu's grave. Bad ideas like this killed Home Grocer and they'll kill Hulu. The days of broadcast television are numbered, but charging me while still profiting from comercials? Nuh-Uh. Someone with a better-realized business model will put Hulu employees out of work.

And hey...Just how much DID that Hulu superbowl ad cost?


Chris   October 24th, 2009 4:35 pm ET

Yep. I agree with all the comments. I use Hulu but would NEVER pay for it. I can get the major networks off the air for free and record those programs.

“I think a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content. I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value..."

So this idiot is saying he must charge people in order for them to appreciate the value? Hmmm... Then the broadcast network model has been severely flawed since its very inception. Despite the fact that people regulary what and value this programming.

This guy, and the entertainment business in general, is an idiot.


whydoucare   October 24th, 2009 4:37 pm ET

R.I.P HULU


Brian   October 24th, 2009 4:38 pm ET

'Free is very hard to monetize'

Try to buy ads on hulu... They get up to $70 CPM for major shows., which, afaik is more than cable.

Whether they can break even on that, who knows.

I'd rather pay for no commercials, on demand access. It's called a set of DVDs.


Greg   October 24th, 2009 4:38 pm ET

I'd pay for hulu if the content that's currently being offered is still free, but I get more premium content like HBO and Shotime content as well as free commercials to the regular content.

I wouldn't pay for hulu any other way.


vbabe   October 24th, 2009 4:38 pm ET

Well it was nice was while it lasted....I


Christine   October 24th, 2009 4:39 pm ET

That's disappointing news. It won't make sense to pay to watch shows that usually post a week later.


Jeff   October 24th, 2009 4:40 pm ET

I agree with you 100%. I was watching Arrested Development Season 5 when they yanked it. What the!? Now I'm watching Always Sunny in Phili and there's Season 2 and 5 only. What the? And now they want to charge people for this limited service of theirs. It's a choppy service that isn't running on all pistons and it's currently free. I'm not going to PAY for the same so-so quality and limited content.


Greg   October 24th, 2009 4:40 pm ET

I also think Hulu needs to revitalize their advertising model.

You have a direct way to connect with your audience. You can poll their demographic information and a way to deliver commercials that are custom tailored to the user. That's the big goal of advertising.


es573   October 24th, 2009 4:40 pm ET

To the so called "Hulu board", DO NOT APPROVE THIS!!! You will undo everything that has been accomplished over the past 2 (or more) years. You will be the latest internet age casualty 6 months after the subscription fee is approved and rolled out. If you charge your viewers to access content, you'll have no viewers (end of rant).


sarah   October 24th, 2009 4:40 pm ET

I have never had a problem with watching the commercials on Hulu. They are by far shorter than the ones on cable/regular tv. American companies have a huge greed problem, that's why the American economic system is currently in financial ruin almost across the board. So, Hulu, if you're listening, think of it this way, if you keep things as they are, you will guarantee yourselves a steady and reliable income. If you begin charging for access to your site, you will be out of a job very soon.


Julie   October 24th, 2009 4:41 pm ET

Well, if that happens, I mine as well give up on TV all together.


corey   October 24th, 2009 4:41 pm ET

i don't get TV reception where i live sense 9/11 (upper Manhattan)and live on DSL, i love HULU to watch the same shows that are on TV for free and would be forced to get cable or move a few blocks east for TV.
if HULU starts to charge for the same shows that are on TV for FREE than i will have to say BY/BY HULU .

and will just go to JOOST.com,ABC.com,NBC.com,CBS.com,CNN.com/live,TV.com.


immererin   October 24th, 2009 4:42 pm ET

well now what am I going to show my 2-year old as a reward for good behaviour? as one of few American households without a TV, we use Hulu's Sesame Street clips (bummer = no full episodes) – when he's being especially good. I use network sites like ABC and Lifetime for "regular" programming.

I guess I'd pay $3-5 a month for Hulu if there were NO interruptions AND full episodes of Sesame Street...


Ken   October 24th, 2009 4:42 pm ET

See ya, Hulu! Nice knowin' ya!


Mike   October 24th, 2009 4:43 pm ET

After be money raped by the cable and satellite companies . I dropped them all because of the high fees to watch what ?repeats after repeats .then add all those infomercials
I discovered Hulu and it was a great alternative to pay TV but being ripped of by pay tv still leaves a sour taste in my mouth and I sure as hell won't be caught in that trap again Hulu goes to fees and I sure as hell say bye bye to them to


Jeff   October 24th, 2009 4:43 pm ET

The income is fine with commercials when you put in on your channels. But online they think they have a new cash cow.
Big money execs love to double dip, gotta get that new yahct!


Jordan   October 24th, 2009 4:47 pm ET

I don't have cable or local channels at my house and I work swing shift or graveyard a few nights a week, so I get all my TV watching from Hulu. But there is no way that I'm going to pay to use thier website.


Tim   October 24th, 2009 4:47 pm ET

I wonder– if this "free model" isn't a viable way to support their programming; even on the internet where costs are so low, what this means for simple non-cable broadcast FOX? Will they shut down and go to cable only so people can't freeload?


Christine   October 24th, 2009 4:48 pm ET

I love Hulu! I also would not say that I endure the commercials rather than for the most part enjoy them. Most bring a great strong message to my children from living drug free and healthy lives to caring about the environment and helping others! Hulu is our television for the most part. If they were to expand their content (i.e. make an agreement to get H.B.O. and Showtime)I would not mind paying a bit for it. They are wanting to go online anyway. If they can't get more big names however. They will lose many customers and greed will have prevailed.


phil   October 24th, 2009 4:51 pm ET

I'd pay extra on hulu for shows that wouldn't otherwise make the cut on cable. think arrested development at one end or star trek at the other. (or the unit for that matter).

But as I already pay for cable I wouldn't pay extra just to watch it later via the internet.

It makes sense that people who have ditched cable for hulu should pay something (else all nbc and fox will be able to afford to show is endless pointless reality shows that cost nothing to make)

Unfortunately I expect those that live in a cable-less world would pretty quickly switch to torrents rather than paying for hulu, so I really don't see this working guys.


Warren Sanford   October 24th, 2009 4:51 pm ET

When they charge for hulu-hulu will die-I guarantee it-so whatever Comcast pays for it-expect a complete loss unless its wrapped up in my top tier service-just over the principle of the idea-as a matter of fact-Comcast will have bought themselves anti-advertising-which is much more effective-here let me show you for a while on twitter morons...these people are idiots.

one penny is too much-crash and burn-terminal failure to understand anything but television on Comcasts part-I know...I'm a customer-and Comcast sucks at everything else but TV.


Tina   October 24th, 2009 4:51 pm ET

If Hulu charges, the bye, bye Hulu and hello network owned entertainment portals; I can get Lost on ABC.com, too.


veronica   October 24th, 2009 4:52 pm ET

I loved hulu. Nope, won't pay for it. I think they get a pretty penny for those commericals and they seem as greedy as wall street.


Aaron   October 24th, 2009 4:53 pm ET

mmmmmmaybe if they don't include commercials... just maybe.. but no more than $5 per month, and if I still have to see commercials, then I will officially forget I ever knew Hulu...


Lemmiwinks   October 24th, 2009 4:55 pm ET

Nope. Won't pay for it. The commercials are fine by me.

The American entertainment industry, it seems, can't quite seem to get the message that charging for things that people can already get for free on the internet only further separates them from what limited control they already have over their own content.


MPA   October 24th, 2009 4:55 pm ET

Wait a minute. You expect me to watch the commercials, in addition to paying?

I can just go to the appropriate production's websites and view the contents for free.

It was just convenient to go to Hulu.

Good luck, you won't get a dime from me.


Doc Savage   October 24th, 2009 4:55 pm ET

Great!!! I'll be buying Slingbox stock!!


John   October 24th, 2009 5:01 pm ET

Been watching Hulu for over two years now. If they start charging more than likely I will go to another site to watch shows online. It's a shame that the commercials they force us to watch just isn't enough to support them. There are many alternatives to Hulu and I'm sure they will prosper in Hulu's demise since it will be one of the very few that charge subscription fees on top of it's advertisments.


Kris   October 24th, 2009 5:01 pm ET

If you start charging HULU, you'd better not show me one commercial, and i don't expect to pay more than $4.99 lol per year. I'll drop you so fast and return to watching the shows I like on their respective websites...ABC, NBC, etc , i'll be llike WHO-LU??? Besides all the networks have their shows on their own websites for FREE!


Chad   October 24th, 2009 5:01 pm ET

I don't think I would pay even if it were commercial free. But I certainly wouldn't be upset if they had2 or even 3 commercials during each break. I understand they need to make money and I enjoy it the service.


Sina   October 24th, 2009 5:04 pm ET

If it happens, I'll start downloading again.


K   October 24th, 2009 5:05 pm ET

I understand the need to monetize, but a subscription based model will only be compelling to those that find Hulu offering something that others can't. So far, the product/service differentiation from Hulu is not significant enough for me to cough out the dollars. Many who have commented seem to share the same sentiment.

bye-bye Hulu.


Tom   October 24th, 2009 5:08 pm ET

That really sucks. I use Hulu a lot. If they charge I'm done


Tina   October 24th, 2009 5:09 pm ET

Hulu is my life. I would not pay for cable even if I could afford it. I've had it in the past, and often there was nothing on anyway. This is not going to fly. The government must somehow be involved ;)


Pissed   October 24th, 2009 5:11 pm ET

Stupid Hulu, you just had to go and mess up a pretty good thing.


Ben   October 24th, 2009 5:12 pm ET

NewsCorp really has no clue how to utilize new technologies, and they just can't accept that they're not able to own all of them. So they pull slick moves like this. Read between the words: they're forcing people to "appreciate the value" of what they're receiving? Sorry, NewsCorp, we're not three-year-olds. There will AlWAYS be other options.


KR   October 24th, 2009 5:12 pm ET

Is this a ploy to derive more profit from Hulu or to put more eyes back on cable when everyone refuses to pay? Either way, it's a win-win for News Corp. This is the problem with media conglomerates and also why content suffers so badly – whether it's drama or news.


Anthony   October 24th, 2009 5:12 pm ET

Hee Hee "Good Luck with that Hulu"

Happy Trails !


Elson   October 24th, 2009 5:13 pm ET

guess what Hulu lots of people are not going to pay for the service... with all the commericals that you add to the programs you should be getting plenty of money.... hell just had more commericals to squeeze more money out of the companies.... but dont worry there is plenty of other websites out there and will provide FREE shows.... i give it a month or so till their site ratings go down and they go back to being free.... till then PEACE....


Renee   October 24th, 2009 5:13 pm ET

If hulu begins to charge: I will upgrade my tivo, get back to Netflix, and probably read more. Seem like a pretty thin attempt at padding the bottom line. Maybe the entertainment bubble has burst and the industry should stop paying actors ten million dollars per movie or 1 million dollars per episode. All good things must come to an end, i guess.


Bob   October 24th, 2009 5:14 pm ET

Who in their right mind would pay for Hulu?
Everything on they have has aired somewhere else before it landed on Hulu.


Hulu Lover   October 24th, 2009 5:17 pm ET

I love, love , love Hulu but I will not pay one cent for it, I will go back to watching my cable tv and buying and renting movies from my Redbox service machine. I heard a comment the other day on Oprah from a Danish woman, about how they live in their country, "LESS SPACE, LESS STUFF, MORE LIFE.

I am changing how I lived both by force and by choice, the situation has me down to basic cable and rare movies outings to the mall. Instead i stay home, play with my dogs, go to my kids games and go to the beach. I watch Hulu to see the shows I like when i want to see them and to watch national geographic types shows or old movies. I am not paying for anything ever again unless I need it to stay alive food, electric, gas(until I can get a solar car) bottom line no more consumer driven life style do not need the adds and do not care for the social pier pressure to have all the stuff they sell me on tv and news stands.

Bad move from the CEO, its always about how the quarter earnings are doing for these guys vs the stock price and projected earnings, growing for the sake of growing, the value of what they sell is the last thing they think about. They have great data collection with Hulu because its free, gives them great six sigma results to sell the adds and target the stuff they do pitch to us, stupid CEO looking to earn a bigger bonus by selling more, short term revenue gain and loosing the core of their clients base who generate the date they need to sell the adds they sell.

Thats why we are screwed today wrong metrics, we are good at buying and selling not making anything, its all about marketing and financial managements of the ledger.


Kyle   October 24th, 2009 5:18 pm ET

Seriously? No ones going to use this when they start charging. They will make more money on advertising by keeping it free than they ever will on subscriptions. These companies still can't seem to grasp the digital age. Complete fail.


Kathy   October 24th, 2009 5:18 pm ET

A clear pitfall for Hulu should they actually go through with the proposal. Hulu gained a user base because it's free, and now they're going to forego
their commitment and primary foundation that enabled Hulu to become what it is today- See ya Hulu.


Lora Keady   October 24th, 2009 5:18 pm ET

would definitely not use HULU if it starts charging. The whole reason people use Hulu is because they VALUE the lack of charge and minimal commercial interruptions.


Brad   October 24th, 2009 5:21 pm ET

I would pay for the hulu experience if:

1. All commercials were removed
2. Every episode of every season of every show were available everyday (eliminate the need to rent, buy or download old seasons)
3. All clips and trailers were moved to their own area and didn’t pop up in general searches.

And since this would never happen I guess I’ll find the “Next” hulu! Hope you all change your minds cause I think it hulu will be a thing of the past if you continue down this path.

Note to hulu!!! Its not like your site is that “super special”, you only save me a few minutes of searching the actual networks site for the same streaming video content.


John   October 24th, 2009 5:26 pm ET

How dare they give you thousands of hours of entertainment for free!


Max   October 24th, 2009 5:27 pm ET

I heard before that Hulu had profitability problems, so it's not entirely unexpected they want to start charging subscription fees. As a frequent Hulu user, I think they would have to make a more attractive offering for me to pay for subscription – no commercials, higher quality streaming video, immediate avaiability of new episodes of network shows (e.g. House is available next day and not next week), better catalog (e.g. more British shows like Doc Martin or Green Wing).


i hope someone from hulu   October 24th, 2009 5:32 pm ET

is reading these comments...


Yvonne   October 24th, 2009 5:33 pm ET

I watch Hulu daily but I will find other options if they move to a subscription based service.


Trig   October 24th, 2009 5:36 pm ET

I love the arrogance of Chase Carey's comment, "I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value". No Mr. Carey, you don't. I am intellegent enough to appreciate the value with Hulu being an advertiser sponsored service. If Hulu does in fact go to a subscription service, it's farewell, Hulu for me.


nikki   October 24th, 2009 5:37 pm ET

Eeks.. Goodbye hulu!


Gary   October 24th, 2009 5:39 pm ET

I would NOT pay for HULU.

The commercials are fine by me, but not a subscription fee.

The TPTB should go read the "Cluetrain Mainifesto" for NONE of the suits at NewsCorp have any idea. In fact the only thing ANY of them know is to lick Murdoch's boots!

News Corp owned TV Guide for several years. When they sold it a year ago it was for one US Dollar and the new buyer assumed ALL liabilities.

So why even bother with HULU as a paid service – it will be a non-starter!


jack   October 24th, 2009 5:41 pm ET

the dumbest move possible


Devil's Advocate   October 24th, 2009 5:42 pm ET

I'm going to be the devil's advocate here – but I would be willing to bet that anyone else in their position would realize that "free content" does not a good business model make. This model works for YouTube and open source software only because the content offered was content acquired at no cost. I can't say I blame them: I thought it was more than generous of them to offer multi-million dollar produced shows at no cost for as long as they did.
Be honest with yourself: are you willing to provide your services for free? I don't know about you, but time spent away from my family means time I'd better be getting paid for.


Katherine   October 24th, 2009 5:42 pm ET

Yeah, Pandora music does the same thing, after 40 hrs of lsitening they want you to pay, or wait till the next month.
When this happens i go RIGHT over to a different internet site and listen to my music there. For free.
This is exactly what i plan to do with HULU if they start charging.
IM going to go find my tv elsewhere
GOODBYE HULU


james   October 24th, 2009 5:42 pm ET

Bad move Hulu. Paid commercial programming? I think not. You just dug yourself an e-grave.


Marks   October 24th, 2009 5:48 pm ET

If Hulu starts charging I will abandon it.


J   October 24th, 2009 5:51 pm ET

The scumbags in suits are just not rich enough yet, huh?


Jeremy Sanders   October 24th, 2009 5:54 pm ET

The only reason HULU was successful was because it was FREE.


Max   October 24th, 2009 5:55 pm ET

Good. Luck. With. That.


Jasmine   October 24th, 2009 5:57 pm ET

I love Hulu, it's awesome. But I just don't know if I love it enough to pay for it. Let me think, I mainly use it to watch old television shows (Bob Newhart, WKRP, westerns etc.) or shows that come on regular television like Fox, etc. I'll probably do what I did before I found Hulu about a year ago, buy dvds of my favourite old shows and watch non-cable tv.


Heather   October 24th, 2009 5:57 pm ET

I will not pay for Hulu. I use it now as an alternative to cable tv, but it if it's charged I'll go directly to the network sites, or find an alternate way to view the programs I watch.


JeramieH   October 24th, 2009 6:00 pm ET

I don't mind the commercials because you know when, where, and how long they'll be. Besides, it's only one commercial per break, not 5-7 commercials per break like TV.

I might pay < $10 per month for it given their current content. There's a worthwhile play-on-demand convenience factor over regular TV.


DeeGeeJay   October 24th, 2009 6:02 pm ET

Their so called "business model" is that of "value added" and the only value they add is the convenience of one stop shopping. Do these geniuses REALLY think it is more convenient to first, sign up for a subscription and second, to PAY for a service their audience can get elsewhere for free than to just type abc, cbs, nbc, etc.? Where they get there business degrees anyway?


Benjamin   October 24th, 2009 6:02 pm ET

I guess our "free trial" is over. Sad to see almost every company scrambling for money cut-throat style.


Sulusux   October 24th, 2009 6:04 pm ET

Cya Hulu. I found a service I paid for by exchanging my time for advertisements. I was willing to do that.

I have 2 terabytes of HD space mostly empty. They won't be after a while.


Mike   October 24th, 2009 6:06 pm ET

Haha. Yeah. I don't think so.

If it stops being free, I'm just going to pirate the shows.


Vito   October 24th, 2009 6:08 pm ET

BYE BYE HULU, RIP...are they kidding me. The internet is the largest media platform in the world with tons of free content on all of the major network sites and other places. Why would anyone pay for free content. get a grip before its to late ..........WOW give me a break.


Karen   October 24th, 2009 6:10 pm ET

I love Hulu, but I agree, I won't pay for it. Several of the networks have on-demand, so if there's something we can't or forget to Tivo, we watch it on demand. We got hooked on "Glee" from Hulu, because Fox doesn't have on demand. Now that we are caught up, we can record "Glee" but we miss a couple of other things. If all networks go On Demand, there will be no reason for Hulu...they'd better keep that in mind.


Vanessa   October 24th, 2009 6:12 pm ET

Terrible idea...buh-bye Hulu!


Matthew   October 24th, 2009 6:13 pm ET

This is unacceptable. If they charge, I will not pay. And I'm going to protest this.

The joys of greedy companies.


Johnny P   October 24th, 2009 6:15 pm ET

What you all should realize is that most people pay $25 to $60 just for internet access. And what do you get for that? A lousy stinking wire to your house or less than 5 Mbps data rate download to your computer. For $60 a month, these internet service providers should be providing tons of free content. Cox cable, Time Warner and Comcast are crap because they show too many commercials, they play lousy content, and they have too many repeats and you can't schedule what YOU want to watch. The FCC is also to blame for the poor content because they censor almost every show because the content is "Not suitable for under 18 viewers." Well, if all these kids that are getting pregnant, bringing weapons to school, beating up on each other, etc. need to be protected from TV, that's a real joke.


Wesley B.   October 24th, 2009 6:15 pm ET

I also use Hulu several times a week. And if they charge, I walk.
I'd sooner watch twice as many commercials than pay out of pocket. Especially now that cable companies are looking to charge more for higher bandwidth usage. It be like paying twice for HD streaming and who wants or needs that?

Besides, now that the value of the model's been proven, another service would gladly jump in to fill those shoes if Hulu did something that stupid. Between YouTube moving into more commercial arenas, NetFlix offering streaming through a variety of formats even easier to use than a computer (like through the XBox or Roku direct to the TV screen), and free Hulu-imitators already cropping up, Hulu's only real advantage are its size and free nature. Make it a pay model and it will be dead within 6 months.


Faye   October 24th, 2009 6:18 pm ET

I hardly ever watch TV. I MIGHT watch 3 shows per week, so of course cable isn't cost-efficient for me. If Hulu starts charging, I'll just stop watching altogether, and start renting movies, 2 for 1, at our local video store. I can take it, or leave it. I think they're crazy to start charging a subscription fee. It's called GREED, and in this case GREED = SUICIDE! Buh-Bye, Hulu!


Howard   October 24th, 2009 6:19 pm ET

Well it was nice while it lasted....nothing's free without a price...there's always Fancast.com....hmmmm


Tre   October 24th, 2009 6:20 pm ET

I find it incredibly unfortunate that for network television (CBS, NBC, ABC, and FOX) people are being asked to pay. Remember the gold old days when all you needed was a TV set and an antenna, all you paid for was the electricity? Now, I bought my set (laptop) and pay for internet, and pay for electricity, I refuse to pay for watching programs from TV stations I watched for free for my entire life. Hello torrents..


Michael   October 24th, 2009 6:20 pm ET

Dear Hulu,

Your stupid.

Michael


tchauradar   October 24th, 2009 6:21 pm ET

let's face people... why do you think they offered for free in the first place? Because they want to attract people to it and then start charging. This is the same with nearly everything offered for free on the net... except Google "goodies".


John L   October 24th, 2009 6:21 pm ET

Someone mentioned they'd be willing to pay $15 per mo for Hulu. Yikes. I was thinking more like $2 max. Netflix is worth $15 per mo. Hulu is not. Hulu is just to catch up on a show (and commercial) you missed. It's not where you go for an evening's entertainment.


ryan   October 24th, 2009 6:23 pm ET

pay... no way...


Wesley B.   October 24th, 2009 6:25 pm ET

I guess I should also add a third Hulu benefit is that you can watch the shows anytime. You don't have to tune in at 7:00 pm Thursday or else miss the show.

That said most shows that have set air times are modern shows (older shows that are off the air have DVD collections so no need for hulu there). And most modern shows are already available elsewhere. You can watch Heroes on Hulu...or NBC.com. Why pay to watch shows on Hulu that I could still get elsewhere for free? Their content simply isn't exclusive enough to charge for.


Zen-k   October 24th, 2009 6:25 pm ET

I love the internet. There's a lot of FREE alternatives out there so I'm saying, best of luck to you HULU


Chris   October 24th, 2009 6:25 pm ET

Hulu is owned by NBC. Alec Baldwin is the spokesperson. Maybe if they stopping running a million dollar ad campain on TV they wouldn't have to charge us users to make up for it. I'm not paying twice to watch tv shows (cable and hulu), like I already pay twice on taxes (income and sales).


Steve R   October 24th, 2009 6:25 pm ET

I'd pay for a commercial free Hulu but there's no chance I'd pay for what they offer now.


dan neeley   October 24th, 2009 6:26 pm ET

I have no problems paying for the service as long as it's around $20 a month or so. I prefer a flat rate and not a "pay per use" type of fee. Also, I certainly hope that a "tiered system" is introduced from Hulu. Again, I will pay and have no problems paying as long as the price is reasonable.


Belle   October 24th, 2009 6:27 pm ET

If Hulu start charging I will certainly not use it any longer. Too many commercials


Joe   October 24th, 2009 6:27 pm ET

nope, c-ya hulu, movin' on to vreel, stage6's replacement , see if that's any better.

GREED,GREED,GREED,GREED,GREED,GREED,GREED,GREED


lynn   October 24th, 2009 6:27 pm ET

i'm not paying for something i can get for free, plain and simple. i can just as easily go to the networks website and watch it at no charge. hulu just made things easier since all shows were in the same spot... sorry, not paying.


jeff   October 24th, 2009 6:27 pm ET

I agree with most of people on here, I have been watching hulu for a while now and I will not pay for it. If it starts charging then I will go somewhere else. They make enough money off advertisers already!!!

I figured it would only be a matter of time before they screwed hulu up!


Jess   October 24th, 2009 6:28 pm ET

Another person here saying that I'll stop watching if Hulu charges for almost all of the reasons previously stated.

BOD! DON'T BE GREEDY!!!!

And kudos, Vic, on pointing out the lack of closed captioning.


KIRK   October 24th, 2009 6:30 pm ET

i just wont use hulu


Andy   October 24th, 2009 6:31 pm ET

Article should be titled "HULU to commit suicide next year."


Jason   October 24th, 2009 6:32 pm ET

"Popular online video service Hulu will start charging subscription fees sometime next year, says News Corp. Deputy Chairman Chase Carey."

Why am I not surprised to see News. Corp behind a large portion of this. The visions of that conglomerate (and Rupert Murdoch) have little place in the current global technological state. They are out-dated and out of touch. This is just another example of their lack of competency in embracing technology. They're going to kill a media cash cow by milking it to death.


Evan Waters   October 24th, 2009 6:32 pm ET

And Rupert Murdoch's ingrained prejudice against letting anyone have content for free claims one of the entertainment industry's few really good ideas in the past decade.

Idiots.


LOL   October 24th, 2009 6:34 pm ET

You've got to be kidding. You pay once by watching commercials, and now you pay AGAIN with subscription fees. Forget it.


Ryan   October 24th, 2009 6:34 pm ET

R.I.P. hulu


ryan   October 24th, 2009 6:36 pm ET

bye bye hulu been nice knowing you


Lou   October 24th, 2009 6:38 pm ET

I still don't get trouble free service from Hulu. Often, the stream does not start and they don't carry everything that I'd like to view. Fix it first and maybe we can talk about charging. Geez, does anyone in Hollywood or New York City have a clue???


JDW   October 24th, 2009 6:38 pm ET

Someone must be trying to make Hulu disappear...charging people will do it. I WILL NEVER PAY! Hu-what? Forgot it already.


Mark   October 24th, 2009 6:39 pm ET

I found Hulu when it was still in beta and I thought "What a concept".

However the problem with "paying for service" is that they will be in competition with the very subscribers that use them. Convenience is key here, everyone on Hulu knows how to get their favorite shows, it will take a little more legwork but they are fine with that because they were doing it before.

The "Online Community" is not like the "Offline Community". We don't roll over for scraps given to us. We do not stand for dictators who tell us what we can or cannot do. We are individual units to a whole. You may see us as 1 number but we are many.

We won't fight you, we won't threaten you, we won't even make a loud noise. What we will do is stop using your service and in the silence of the night we will watch you fade away. This is no threat, just the simple truth.

They say that Gods were the ones that required the belief of the masses to exist in the past. I say that presences online require that same belief system to exist as well. We will see what time will bring, I hope that Hulu will understand that they are in a unique position right now and they hold their own fates in their hands.


Brett   October 24th, 2009 6:40 pm ET

Bye Bye Hulu. I wont waste my time when there are some many other avenues to get the same content.


Carl   October 24th, 2009 6:41 pm ET

Why has broadcast TV been free for its entire existence, but we are always told that TV can't be free on a website?

Is someone just lying? Are the advertisers being idiots? Hulu will have to give me a better excuse than the old "it just can't be done" before I will pay them.


Benita   October 24th, 2009 6:41 pm ET

Nope, I won't pay either.


Ariel   October 24th, 2009 6:42 pm ET

I definitely would not pay.


Brian   October 24th, 2009 6:43 pm ET

Yup! Buh-bye Hulu! I will never use your service again. I already had a group discussion with 37 students, and every single one agreed (all 37!!!), they will stop using Hulu even if they charge – regardless of the amount. Peace out Hulu!


Michael   October 24th, 2009 6:44 pm ET

I enjoy Hulu and even do not mind watching their "paid tv commericals" but as soon as they start making a subscription fee mandatory, I will be gone from Hulu and will deffently find another provider.

Now on the other hand, if Hulu removes all the "paid tv commericals" from all of its content and makes all of their money from a monthly subscriptions I am find with that, and would gladly pay a monthly subscription. I have the feeling that Hulu will not only continue showing "paid tv commericals" but also demand a subscription fee. If this is the case, Hulu's GREED will put their company under!


Marc   October 24th, 2009 6:44 pm ET

Paying for Hulu might make sense, but only if the subscription fee was a way to avoid the commercials.


benn   October 24th, 2009 6:45 pm ET

I've been a member of Hulu since it was in beta – Now that the sickness of greed that infects the human race – has infected the Hulu executives and board members – I believe its time to go

Dang – I really, Really loved watching Hulu too

Hey Hulu –
give me a call –
there are better ways of being a useful service vs. being greedy for money


sb   October 24th, 2009 6:45 pm ET

Actually, free is not all that hard to monetize. Just ask Google. Or any broadcast network. I own several websites that offer free content, and all are quite profitable.

The trouble is that the entertainment industry, ironically, lacks the imagination to take full advantage of the ways in which the Internet, as an interactive medium, can be monetized. Instead, they seek to copy the static television commercial model. If they were to get a bit innovative, I really feel they could make the free model work.

The trouble is that the five or six companies that control most production and distribution are very staid and institutionally conservative. This is why Pixar, with its Silicone Valley leadership, has been able to thrive when other places have struggled.

And as an industry insider and screenwriter, I am as frustrated as everyone else. I'm not all that optimistic about the future of the current entertainment industry. That's why I have become heavily invested in web properties as well.

Perhaps if they were to offer a reasonable monthly fee (say $ 9.95) for broader basic cable offerings on something like a 24 hour post-broadcast lag, I would go for it. ESPN offers a great value-added section to its site for around 5 bucks a month, and I understand their web division is very profitable. But then, they are not as stuck in their ways as Hollywood tends to be.


Tom   October 24th, 2009 6:45 pm ET

Chase Carey is demostrates his ineptitude as a manager with statements like "I think a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content." Statements like that upset customers and drive away audiences. When there's a dramatic reduction in viewership, advertizers will look for greater audiences elsewhere.

As a manager of a multi-billion dollar company, I closely monitor the number of potential customers. As an advertizer on Hulu, I'll say I haven't seen remarkable return on my investments. Perhaps it's time to find a new venue?


Kerelisse   October 24th, 2009 6:47 pm ET

I don't understand what is going on the minds of the guyas at Hulu. Even though Hulu is great all programs can be seen ate the channels' websites like nbc.com, abc.com, fox.com, tbs...etc. So, if Hulu charges people can go see their programs at their personal schedule on other websites...

In this case for Hulu i'm sure it will mean: charge and die...unfortunately


Oscar   October 24th, 2009 6:48 pm ET

Wrong time to start charging. With the economy the way it is, I doubt many people will sign up. Also, they are going to charge AND have commercials? It will be goodbye Hulu for me.


Steven   October 24th, 2009 6:50 pm ET

If we're talking unlimited viewing for $10 with limited commercials – then that's fine. They have to make money for licence clearance and profit.

Anything above that – no; I rather see more commercials than pay a higher monthly.


Will   October 24th, 2009 6:50 pm ET

Quick, someone pass me one last nail for the coffin.


Jacob Shannon   October 24th, 2009 6:50 pm ET

Hulu, very bad mistake, the commercials that hulu shows are able to generate a lot of income, so being greedy will not help your revenue. Try fancast, much better!


julio   October 24th, 2009 6:51 pm ET

thank you mr carey for proving once again that greed is the prime motivator for corporate executives. i cant wait for you to come out in favor of a bailout once hulu hits the skids once the fees are in place and viewership plummets.


Onigiri   October 24th, 2009 6:51 pm ET

It's a shame that the CEO decided to begin charging people for their content. Well, first, I won't pay it. I don't have cable, I use hulu to watch TV shows and some movies (movie content is mediocre). But if they start doing that it's not the end of the world, their main TV network websites are free, still. Also, they could start charging if they want ad free, and more quality of movies. Otherwise its gonna be it's downfall!


kate   October 24th, 2009 6:53 pm ET

Maybe a pay option that does away w/ commercials is acceptable.

But if they charge for all/most of their content, I'm done w/ hulu. I'll just go back to watching it on tv till the next big thing.

Good luck Hulu, it worked great for Napster.


Mary   October 24th, 2009 6:57 pm ET

I agree with Vic re: subtitles, however they need to be placed within the picture the same as on TV...not somewhere way under the picture where you either have to read the script or try to read lips. Can't do both unless your eyes are vertical on your face...lol. If they can accomplish this then I might consider a nominal fee and cancel my DishNetwork.


Lora Jean Small   October 24th, 2009 6:57 pm ET

WOW. what a slap in the face for people who enjoy Hulu. I will not pay for Hulu. i refuse to pay for T.V. in any way shape or form. The air ways are suppose to be free.


Todd   October 24th, 2009 6:59 pm ET

Newscorp is planning to charge for all of its now "free" content on the web. It also intends to charge for use of any of it's news stories, images or video content. They are trying to convince all other providers to join them in this. Antitrust regulators take note.


Omar   October 24th, 2009 7:01 pm ET

Will start charging = Will start Dying. Hulu will fade away into our memories, bye bye!


buzzy   October 24th, 2009 7:02 pm ET

57 channels and nothing on.... not 500

At every turn, companies want us on subscription service – their persistence should tell you something. For tv, music, etc., if I pay I want to own it and w/o the crest, tide bs.


Ron   October 24th, 2009 7:03 pm ET

I watch Hulu semi-regularly, however I have to agree with the majority here that I would not continue to utilize the service if there were a fee. I already pay for satellite and DSL and I need to leave at least some of my funds available for food and shelter.


PamPam   October 24th, 2009 7:08 pm ET

So long hulu, you'll be missed....but easily replaced...


Adam   October 24th, 2009 7:11 pm ET

Well...I watch HULU everyday...literally...Guess I got to find a new place to watch my shows


BornUndaStadium   October 24th, 2009 7:12 pm ET

Adios Hulu.


Joanne   October 24th, 2009 7:13 pm ET

In today’s economy many people do not have cable anymore. I do not have cable, but I do have the net, hulu, and netflicks. I like hulu.com but it is no netflicks. The only way I would ever pay for hulu, if they would become greater than Netflicks, and although that is not impossible, because I believe it can be done; the time is not now if they have not built the new and improved Netflicks type.

Good luck Hulu I am rooting for you.


Shawn   October 24th, 2009 7:13 pm ET

Wow, it is absolutely amazing the number of people who think they are entitled to watch TV shows that can cost millions of dollars to produce for free. Americans really have become the "but I deserve to have it" society. Disgusting!


yasir tufail   October 24th, 2009 7:14 pm ET

I am a college student and i can't watch all my shows on time. So I started to watch all my shows on hulu. If they will start charging us for hulu, I won't be paying for it. I would rather wait for all my shows to come on DVDs and commercial free.


john   October 24th, 2009 7:14 pm ET

Blah Blah blah,,,, thats what i hear from everyone. Im pretty sure that if they start charging, it will be a reasonable price. I can assure you that they are needing some fund to keep the server maintenance.


Libby   October 24th, 2009 7:15 pm ET

I dont have a tv and enjoy watching my favorite shows on Hulu. However, I would still drop Hulu if they charged! I would just follow shows on their network sites. No hard decision!


Jeff   October 24th, 2009 7:15 pm ET

I do not think Hulu will do away with their free, commercially subsidized programs. These programs, like Family Guy, 30 Rock, and others, will continue the way they have been. It's a great way to get you to the site.

But, wouldn't it be great if you could buy access to cable shows, like True Blood or catch up on The Sopranos, without having to pay for a full HBO subscription each month? I would definitely be willing to pay a "per show" subscription fee. It would have to be cheaper than buying episodes off iTunes..I don't want to own it, just have it available on demand.


john Loughlinn   October 24th, 2009 7:16 pm ET

There's a ga-zillion different sites where you can access video content. Many of the same networks that appear on Hulu host their own free content on their own network's website. i.e. CBS, History Channel, Discovery to name a few. There's also a ton of content hosted on Asian websites. Its not that difficult to google alternative websites with current links to shows hosted in other places. The whole point of accessing video online is to get it for free. You're already paying for the internet access in the first place. Why would you pay a subscription fee on top of that? It would be easier to just get cable TV again.


am   October 24th, 2009 7:18 pm ET

Wakeup people.

Hulu will charge subscription fees AND continue to insert commercial interruptions. Why? Because they are attempting to maximize the "value" to their owners. In other words, they are greedy and think the average consumer is a sucker.

I dropped DirecTV because I didn't like paying for the privilege of watching commercials and infomercials.

I sure am not going to pay for low-res internet content with commercials.


Ty   October 24th, 2009 7:18 pm ET

I canceled my TV service and only watch shows on HULU and use my "rabbit ears" when I need live, local channels. It saves me alot of money that I really need. If HULU starts charging, I will just bite the bullet and go back to my T.V. subscription service. It was good while it lasted!


Nathan   October 24th, 2009 7:23 pm ET

Hulu can kiss my service goodbye as I am not paying for to watch shows on my computer. Oh well their is always youtube I suppose.


S Pett   October 24th, 2009 7:24 pm ET

Some people have mentioned that the networks play their content for free on their websites so they can just watch that instead of Hulu. The problem with that argument is that Hulu is not an independent company. It is owned by the networks. Started by NBC and then bought into by News Corp. (FOX) and Disney (ABC). So if they start charging for Hulu don't you think they will charge for stuff on their own sites as well?


Miruka   October 24th, 2009 7:26 pm ET

Just another example of big media playing the same old games (yes, hulu was spawned by old-world television moguls) and being horribly out of touch with the desires of their audience.

Essentially no one will pay for hulu unless there are a few major changes:
1. No commercials
2. Mobile device support (ie downloadable content or lower bitrate streams)
3. More content - especially content that can't be sourced elsewhere.
4. An end to geographic restrictions.

But realistically, no one will pay for hulu. I certainly won't. No one I know will - not with the proliferation of torrents and other streaming sites, legal or not, available as alternatives. This, following the boxee incident will certainly cause their audience to dwindle.


Robert   October 24th, 2009 7:27 pm ET

If Hulu charges, they better improve on their content. some of the shows run you through 6 or 7 seasons of a 10 season show, then drop you flat.
Also why should I pay for something that is already free on. NBC CBS<ABC.com's. Now if Hulu came up with a format, that offered commerical free tv, with current episodes of our favorite shows plus oldies, and current as well as old movies, that might be worth something.


Charles   October 24th, 2009 7:28 pm ET

Greed, for lack of a better term, is good....................
Gordon Gecko (Wall Street)

However, if Hulu thinks I will find paying for something free that I can find elsewhere acceptable, than, to quote Homey the Clown:

"I don't think so.............. Homey don't play dat"


Richard Green   October 24th, 2009 7:29 pm ET

Paying for Hulu? HA HA HA HA ! STOP IT, HA HA HA HA , NO REALLY! HA HA HA HA , I CAN'T TAKE IT, HA HA HA HA, I'm going to pass out. Need air.


Stuart Evans   October 24th, 2009 7:30 pm ET

that's a bummer... i guess i won't be using hulu if they go through with it...


Dario Smith   October 24th, 2009 7:32 pm ET

TV these days isn't worth a penny. Later Hulu.


daniel   October 24th, 2009 7:33 pm ET

“I think a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content. I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value" – This is the dumbest thing any person has ever said. The "free model" is what made the internet so successful.

Facebook and Classmates.com initially had about the same concept. Classmates charged, Facebook did not, I think Chase Carey can probably figure out where I am going with this.

I do not pay to watch Family Guy now and I will not pay for it in the future. So if Hulu goes to a pay model then I will record the shows and watch them when I want.


Jake Honig   October 24th, 2009 7:35 pm ET

I think they make plenty of money charging for ads? If I'm gonna pay to watch a show, there better not be a commercial break.


Jared   October 24th, 2009 7:35 pm ET

As an alternative to cable(comcast), I will consider the subscription dependant on the pricing. However, I used my PS3 to stream Hulu before but they block it now. If that option doesn't come back then they will never get my money.


Chris   October 24th, 2009 7:38 pm ET

I like the two option model with a few changes. Free service could be as it is now, commericals and limited shows. However, a paid service shall include: No commercial interruptions ( i say interruptions because a 30 second add prior to the show wouldn't be bad), all new shows posted the day after it is aired on tv, and unlimited access to all episodes of shows.


Brian   October 24th, 2009 7:39 pm ET

HA! Hulu will surely go along with the RIAA, MPAA, various labor unions, etc... given enough time. Everyone every step of the way has to get their greedy little hands in the cookie jar.

Greedy greedy greedy capitalists will Live AND die by the same sword.

If you're going to shove ads down your customers' throats, then keep it "free" otherwise charge and make it ad-free.


Michael   October 24th, 2009 7:42 pm ET

That's all News Corp. is doing nowadays, charging people for stuff that used to be free. I have no idea why they just want money all of a sudden, it's not like they need it.


mondo   October 24th, 2009 7:44 pm ET

Yeah, ...bye hulu. They don't get their market. A lot of networks have websites to watch their shows free as well and then their is bit torrents, and host of other ways to get free episodes. People just went to hulu because they were fast and easy.....and free. Watching them do this is quite embarrassing and looks a little idiotic. Adios Amigo


lynne in Houston   October 24th, 2009 7:47 pm ET

I find it funny that Hulu is owned by Fox, NBC, and ABC, yet it is only Fox that has even mentioned a pay for play plan. This coincides with Newscorp's attempts to move their online newspaper content to a subscription service– a failed attempt I might add.

I wonder if this is something Murdoch and Co. are trying to do without the consent of the other owners. I also wonder what it will do to their partnership.


Doc Johnson   October 24th, 2009 7:48 pm ET

I swear if hulu.com changes to a fee-based model, I will NEVER subscribe to their content. I am very weary of every provider doing a classic 'bait and switch' . First, they lure us in with content and a free delivery model, and then expect to us to cough up fees to maintain our connection. I am DISGUSTED!


Mary   October 24th, 2009 7:50 pm ET

Hulu is great as it is. As long as there is a free alternative I'll be watching a few shows. I have broadband but do not pay for tv shows – no cable or satellite. We watch what we can get on the 3 channels with our antenna and are satisfied with what we can find for free online. Even though there are a few shows I like there really isn't anything I'd pay to watch.


David   October 24th, 2009 7:50 pm ET

I would pay for Hulu if I was able to get a certain channels of my choice for lets say a low price of .99 per channel. If you really didn't want commercials you could pay extra a month per channel to not have commercials.
I would like to see an subscription that I can control instead of telling me this is what I get for the money I spend.


jay   October 24th, 2009 7:51 pm ET

Why would you pay for Hulu? You can watch the same programs directly from the networks' websites for free, and I find the networks tend to have a better connection/quality.


Canada   October 24th, 2009 7:53 pm ET

Hulu is not availible in Canada even though all the programs are available on free TV channels, there excuse is licensing with their partners. Partners who are also the companies generating the content, go figure.

They are greedy and do not seam to understand their client, they need to understand why people use a service and then build a business model that makes sense. It makes sense to view "free" advertiser supported content that can be viewed at the users convenience, not at the networks convenience. It may make sense to charge a nominal fee for the user to view content at their convenience without the interruption of advertising. it does not make sense to the user to both pay and watch ads.


Jeff   October 24th, 2009 7:58 pm ET

They could increase ads for the free users and if you pay a subscription fee it would be ad free. That is the only way it makes sense!


Axl   October 24th, 2009 7:59 pm ET

If News Corp. does that, then Hulu.com may become the next MySpace of online videos (meaning, most users will look elsewhere, just like people have been moving out of its social network MySpace and going to Facebook, but in this case, most will just go to the TV channels' web sites or YouTube).

Also, isn't News Corp. the one who wants to charge for the news people gets to read online for free?

Charging for news & TV shows online just won't do any good.

At least the news shall remain free.


Pablo Mahave-Veglia   October 24th, 2009 8:00 pm ET

Yeap, Trashy TV should be free. Thus the trashy.


Tracy   October 24th, 2009 8:03 pm ET

I gave up cable because they raised prices $10 and I realized, I just wasn't getting that much value out of it. I paid a fraction of the price for Netflix and 80% of what I wanted to watch was on Netflix. 10% of what I wanted to watch was on network, available free if I get off my butt and install an antenna. 10% of what I wanted to watch was on cable – and I could live without it. Then I found Hulu and never got around to installing the antenna.

Hulu kind of sucks. If you stop in the middle of a program and come back in another session, Hulu forces you to watch all of the commercials, even though you're fast-forwarding through half the show. I keep thinking "this sucks, install the antenna and tivo this crap." If Hulu charges, it better be a low price, high-def, RELIABLE (which they aren't now), and commercial free or I'm gone. Most networks offer their shows free. Hulu is a minor convenience, nothing more. I have stopped watching some shows altogether because they blast the volume – when watching online, it's a pain to mouse over to the volume and I misplaced my remote.

Make TV expensive enough or inconvenient enough, and I'll just buy books. I don't watch TV at all when I travel – no Tivo means no TV. I don't miss it on the road. I just can't sit through 4 commercials in a row, or blasting loud commercials, or ever-increasing cable bills – for what? It's just shows. I cancelled cable a little over a year ago and saved enough $$ to pay cash for vacation. I'll take the vacation (debt free!) over 120 channels of nothing worth watching.


Brett   October 24th, 2009 8:05 pm ET

What are they teaching in business schools? Or maybe executives should have to go back and retake some classes. Or did the owners of cable companies buy Hulu, and want it dead anyway? Just like I have stopped using Pandora radio for doing the same thing(limiting the free radio to 40 hours a month, even after putting commercials inbetween songs), I will stop using Hulu as soon as they start charging.


Canadian Hulu Watcher   October 24th, 2009 8:05 pm ET

This is gonna suck, because I love watching Hulu it is the best alternative to cable.


reza Behnam   October 24th, 2009 8:06 pm ET

I will not pay


John   October 24th, 2009 8:07 pm ET

I'm not much of a TV fan but hulu was the reason I started watching NBC and Fox. Let's see how many bad decisions they can make.
Raising prices for advertisers would be a better idea, no?


Jeff   October 24th, 2009 8:08 pm ET

"I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value."

I see. It's all because we don't appreciate the value.

Did David Letterman allow you to borrow one of his writers?


Hulu Has to Pay Employees, Rent and Equipment...   October 24th, 2009 8:08 pm ET

While I have only watched an occasional show on Hulu, I do understand that life is not a free ride.

I cant believe everyone wants everything for free. Someone has to pay for things.

I probably would not mind paying for a reasonable fee, however, the commercials would HAVE TO GO.

No, I dont work for Hulu and I'm on a disability pension.


Jamaal   October 24th, 2009 8:10 pm ET

I couldnt see paying for hulu, the quality of the video is great, but if it comes to it, i'll suffer with low quality on a free site, and while we're on the subject of things that start free, does anyone still use net zero?


deep   October 24th, 2009 8:12 pm ET

Another excellent golden-egg laying exercise gets a killer-blow, as the TV Network executives trying to kill the geese. ... Nothing new really.

This is the AGE of the INTERNET ... the AGE of GOOGLE & Facebook! ... They make most of their revenue (& are worth billions) while providing their content for free to the users. Hulu is going to lose out by being too greedy. Typical of TV Networks, alright.

But, really, how can they be so dumb ? How can they NOT see the potential of HULU to make more money than they can think of? I thought that was where they were headed .. but, instead, they are going back to the old system.

What am I talking about? How many of you (I assume all of you are HULU users) have watched a show (or at least checked out a couple of episodes) that you would've otherwise given a miss ? I've watched & started following so many series that I didn't watch earlier.

Do they think that I'd do that if I had to pay for it.

This is the bottom-line.

I WOULD NOT PAY to watch anything on HULU. And they are missing out on all the revenue that they could've made by making me watch shows that really watch just to kill my boredom.


Hank   October 24th, 2009 8:15 pm ET

Just like all these other comments ... if Hulu starts charging, then I'll be saying "good bye" and removing its bookmark. Definitely not paying for it!


Shawn Vanden   October 24th, 2009 8:15 pm ET

Same for this viewer and Fan of Hulu. When Cable first arrived, it was the commercial free alternative with niche programing. Now it is as commercially laden as broadcast television, and you pay a subscription on top of that !


John   October 24th, 2009 8:15 pm ET

Ok, as a voice of reason: I think Hulu is a fantastic service, and that its business model represents the future of online entertainment. Cable and other serial broadcasting technologies are dinosaurs on their way out the door. Nowadays, who needs a cable subscription if they have the internet?

If Hulu charged a nominal, competitive fee for their service, I wouldn't mind paying it. I pay beans for Netflix every month, for instance, and get a LOT of enjoyment out of it. Easily the best subscription service I participate in. Hulu could easily fill a similar niche.

BUT the commercials will have to go, or no dice.


Patrick   October 24th, 2009 8:17 pm ET

Hulu will be left on the ashheap of new media history.


ggray   October 24th, 2009 8:17 pm ET

Oh I love hulu so much that I'd pay whatever they were asking-NOT!!!! Goodbye hulu.


Jason   October 24th, 2009 8:18 pm ET

I wrote to HULU. Here is the reply.

Hi Jason,

Don't worry, Hulu’s mission has always been to help people find and enjoy the
world’s premium, professionally produced content. We continue to believe that the
ad-supported, free service is the one that resonates most with the largest group
of users and any possible new business models would serve to complement our
existing offering.

Thanks,

Varun Narang
Hulu


Nate   October 24th, 2009 8:19 pm ET

Hulu is going to loose most if not all its available viewers. Hulu is already compensated by the companies that have their products advertised on their site. If Hulu starts charging viewers, the subscription better not contain commercials and they better make the buffing rate lightening speed if they want to attract viewers. Already stated, people will most likely use illegal methods to receive their shows and movies. If Hulu didn't know, people don't have money nowadays.


Michigan Viewer   October 24th, 2009 8:19 pm ET

Can you say money grubbing executive sleeze? Take something successful and kill it by charging people to use it. Sure, there will be people who will be willing pay to watch, but the vast majority of us, don't want to pay. In an economy when people are cutting extras from their budget, you go ahead and go for that almighty buck. You'll loose viewers in the end and gain bad publicity. But, you know best.


Barry   October 24th, 2009 8:20 pm ET

Welp, buh-bye Hulu. I'll be dumping you to. I don't have cable, haven't had it for years, mostly just deal with content from Netflix. Hulu was a nice shakeup, but not if I'm paying for the right to watch low-res vids with injected commercials. There are other, simpler, cheaper, higher-res, commercial-free methods of getting the shows I want.


luis   October 24th, 2009 8:20 pm ET

If you start charging...bye bye!!!


Mike   October 24th, 2009 8:23 pm ET

I ditch cable and satellite because of the ever rising fees
I sure will not us Hulu if they go to fee based


Bill C.   October 24th, 2009 8:23 pm ET

Free is not hard to monetize with commercials – just like TV. It sounds like Hulu is trying to commit Hari Kari. Hulu is convenient, but not that much more than just recording from my TV. Whatever.


Shawn   October 24th, 2009 8:26 pm ET

I have used hulu for various shows. I learned how to skip the first commercials in the show I watch. That's a glitch in the player. Mute works well for commercials too. The CNBC Story about how advertising has changed is most likely the reason for subscription based thinking.

I am like the other people who download the programs out there if I can't find unhindered viewing of content, the commercials are a pain but survivable. It is like megavideo who limits time watching to bring you the subscription table. When will these people realize that the internet has so many portals to the content that charging or reaping any money for it is feudal.


Vincent   October 24th, 2009 8:27 pm ET

I actually thought Hulu would be a threat to youtube. If they do start charging, that thought would be non-existent.


Chad   October 24th, 2009 8:27 pm ET

Brilliant move ... as if we all don't already pay for our internet use. Now we may have to pay for hulu? Weak sauce.


Adam Murfreesboro, TN   October 24th, 2009 8:29 pm ET

I for one would be outraged if this deal goes through! I have been enjoying Hulu when it is free but if they start charging then they can say goodbye to me and lots of other people as users.


RT   October 24th, 2009 8:30 pm ET

I would pay if it were up to par with not just the past 5 episodes, but all of them. Also, if they were able to enable enough bandwidth so I could play the shows in fullscreen mode without lag.

Fix your present product before you decide to close the doors to the general market.


Elson   October 24th, 2009 8:34 pm ET

Farwell Hulu....


Ronly Bonly   October 24th, 2009 8:36 pm ET

I haven't used Hulu all that much. Occasionally, but infrequently. My friends keep telling me how cool they think it is, and so lately I've been considering using it more regularly. The idea of them charging for it has turned me off to them so completely, that I don't think I will ever see Hulu in my address bar ever again. There are too many alternatives that haven't threatened to charge me yet.


Alex Haager   October 24th, 2009 8:36 pm ET

Not only is this stupid, but also: every single thing on Hulu (at least as far as TV shows go) can also be found at that show's network's respective website, also free of charge. Want 30 Rock, go to nbc.com. Want Daily Show, go to their website, etc. So why would we pay Hulu just for assembling them in one spot? I will not pay. Thanks.


Fergiebear   October 24th, 2009 8:37 pm ET

Can you say Netflix!!! I love Netflix!!!! I loved Hulu it was fun while it lasted but I have Netflix no cable (too much money) and I am a happy camper!!


Matt   October 24th, 2009 8:37 pm ET

I think this massive chain of people saying they will start downloading content elsewhere if Hulu charges is exactly what is wrong with this country right now. Everyone wants handouts...

Here is the the thing, and economy based around free doesn't work. For content on the internet to remain "free", someone else (advertisers have to pay), so for all the people here who say "i refuse to watch commercials", well they are the ones paying for you to have "free" hulu, so you should probably start begging them to let you watch commercials if you want it to stay "free".

Hulu has put a ton of awesome content, in an easy to find location, that is great quality. Do you have any idea how much money it costs to run something like Hulu? So geniuses, how is Hulu supposed to exist if you don't want commercials and you don't want to pay for it? Solve that problem and you're a zillionaire because you just solved the biggest problem on the internet today.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't think they should charge something outrageous for this, because I wouldn't pay that either, simply because it's not that important to me. But I would pay 20-30 bucks for the year for Hulu as I am a sporadic viewer.

So can we please restore some common sense to this country? whether it's healthcare, content, or employment, it seems like every time i look at a forum online people are bitching (can I say bitching on this?) that they want _____ for free. Free is fun, but you get what you pay for, and if you want to ruin Hulu and return to hunting for high quality torrents be my guest...stop being ignorant and lazy America!


john   October 24th, 2009 8:38 pm ET

Oh it isn't the money, they want to know we value them. So how do they want us to sow that? Love letters? Candy Hearts? E-Greeting Cards?

Seriously though. I cancelled cable and can watch the same stuff for free with my antennae (the signal is still there folks, just get a free box with a Government coupon) Even record it on my trusty VHS. I currently do use Hulu instead, but won't if I have to pay. And I like the commercials, it gives me a chance to take a pee and such. But it would be nice if Hulu had more than two sponsors a month. It gets a little monotonous.


Lee Webb   October 24th, 2009 8:38 pm ET

..well coca cola droped billions of disposal costs on us when it switched to plastic and relieved itself ot the responsibility to process its own glass bottles...

every internet model starts free...once they know the technology works...shazaaam....
$$$$$$$$$
show me the money...CNN will be charging soon Im sure..once all the newspapers get online.


jim   October 24th, 2009 8:39 pm ET

project free tv


j.d.   October 24th, 2009 8:40 pm ET

Ladies and Gentlemen, Hulu has left the building.


John   October 24th, 2009 8:40 pm ET

I watch hulu because it's free. If they charge I won't use it, I'll just watch what I dvr and use it more. I only use hulu because it's convenient because I spend so much time at my computer I don't have to go sit down in the living room of my home. I can watch the tv shows I like anytime, anywhere. But I wouldn't pay for that service.


lonnie   October 24th, 2009 8:42 pm ET

maybe hulu should be bought out by netflicks to increase the amount of streaming video available.


Ken Keeton   October 24th, 2009 8:45 pm ET

I love hulu but if they charge then they better get rid of commercials. I will not tolerate being charged and forced to watch commercial and this is why I will never pay for cable. Either one or the other. Greed always destroys.


JC   October 24th, 2009 8:45 pm ET

I will not pay to use HULU. You have sold this as a FREE service and to not go and charge people is wrong. I watch the comercials and show I would never watch because of the service. If HULU sells out its members and coustomers then I dobut it will make it.... This is a very bad idea! JC


lori   October 24th, 2009 8:46 pm ET

I love being able to log onto Hulu if I miss something or forget to set the DVR......BUT....I will NOT pay for this service! Good Bye Hulu...Someone else will just take your place.


porter   October 24th, 2009 8:50 pm ET

love hulu as it is...pay to play?...goodbye hulu!
hello alternatives...with any luck Carey and friends will get the hint!


Larry H. jenkins   October 24th, 2009 8:50 pm ET

I am a loyal hulu watcher and I enjoy the service very much buy I would be very upset if all of a sudden I had to start paying for a service I was getting for free. I hope someone sees that this would hurt your product in the long run.


juan   October 24th, 2009 8:50 pm ET

crap,there is always torrents am taking off hulu from my booksmarks never will watch again in this country nothing for free


Ryan   October 24th, 2009 8:53 pm ET

I use Hulu every day because it's more convenient for me. If I have to pay, I'll just use my digital cable and DVR more often; it's a pain, but I'm not paying for the content twice.I don't mind the 4-5 min of commercials in a Hulu broadcast, but with my DVR I'll just skip them all.


steve   October 24th, 2009 8:54 pm ET

Yep. "See ya Hulu." Bet you some booksmart egghead with an MBA but "zero sreet-smarts" came up with this brilliant idea.


Allison   October 24th, 2009 8:54 pm ET

This is a load of CRAP!!!!!!! If poeple can watch it for free on T.V. than we should be able to watch it online for free. You people make me sick no wonder our economi is spirialing into a deep crap whole. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR


Christopher   October 24th, 2009 8:55 pm ET

While I agree that both charging and forcing viewers to watch the commercials is wrong, some of you people posting have a really inflated sense of entitlement.

You demand to have content but you want it for free. That's not the way the world works. TV is expensive to produce. Those costs have always been covered first by ad revenue only, then by ads and cable fees.

Networks are losing ad revenue because of DVR (no one watches those commercials). So, they are seeking a new business model. What you are seeing is growing pains. We'll eventually have a whole new model 10 years from now.

Ultimately we either have to pay for content directly, or enjoy it despite ads/marketing because SOMEONE ELSE HAS PAID YOUR TICKET, so to speak.

Stop acting like little brats.


JoeFriday   October 24th, 2009 9:00 pm ET

If Hulu wants to charge a subscription, they need to fully open the gates and become a replacement for cable TV. Hulu should split the difference with the consumer. The consumer gets no cable bill, content on demand, and access on multiple platforms (PC, smart phone, game console, etc.). Hulu and content providers gets $10 per month subscription, a huge customer base for ad supported and premium content ($$$), increased ad revenues, plus additional sales from tie-ins (Disney, think about it).


Corp Fat Cat   October 24th, 2009 9:01 pm ET

Thank goodness some has it right! I am so glad big business is thinking of me! You are not spending enough to support my lifestyle of fancy planes and boats and houses on three continents! We must continue to cut pay for the hourly nobodies and we must increase it for us here at the top! It is important for our freedom! Jesus wants it this way! If you don’t like it then, tough! You’re stuck! I will give you no public option, I will cut your school programs, and I will cut police and fire dept across this country. So my peers do not pay high taxes, that’s for you! Not us! Yes our greed is good! Your ignorance is bliss! I am a Republican! Let us pray to $$$!


Mark   October 24th, 2009 9:02 pm ET

There's a reason why i don't have cable and it's because of the subscription fee. Imagine how much money i've save this past five years? ching-ching!.
What makes you think i will pay to watch over the internet? There will be alternatives.

I've been with Hulu since the beginning and i would like to say "thank you very much" for the great service.


Chris   October 24th, 2009 9:04 pm ET

Hulu has a good thing going right now, its hard to top.

NOBODY IS GOING TO PAY YOU IDIOTS. Make this move and its over, plain and simple. I will can it if this happens and so will everyone else.


Dan   October 24th, 2009 9:10 pm ET

I hope they charge me more than cable, because I can't wait to pay for Hulu. Maybe I can donate to them too, like PBS.


X   October 24th, 2009 9:13 pm ET

By-bye Hulu. Back to torrent.


Mike   October 24th, 2009 9:13 pm ET

Bye-bye Hulu, nice knowing you!!


Eric C.   October 24th, 2009 9:14 pm ET

Just when I thought the media conglomerates were actually starting to get a clue, they prove that they haven't. I knew Hulu was too good to be true.

If anyone is interested in the hulu.com domain, it will expire on February 22, 2012. I doubt they'll be around that long, so it should be up for grabs!


Arnold   October 24th, 2009 9:14 pm ET

I understand they need to be profitable to keep providing a service. If they get more shows and get them faster (sometimes waiting 8 days after a show has aired and everyone else has talked about it really sucks), then I may be willing to pay a small subscription fee. I'm getting ready to disconnect my cable TV because of Hulu and other web sites.


M4DM4N   October 24th, 2009 9:14 pm ET

My wife and I watch all our TV on the interwebs. We do not have cable. That said, there is no way I will pay for Hulu's service. As others have indicated, I will simply go back to torrents or other avenues for viewing TV on the interwebs. Hulu is shooting itself in the foot with this crazy idea. Seems like pretty much everyone else feels the same way. Good bye, Hulu. It was good while it lasted.


chris   October 24th, 2009 9:19 pm ET

Ok...
-Drop all the commercials
-Allow me to stream all the episodes of a particular show instead of just the last 5.
-Switch all Hulu content to HD quality.

Then I might pay IF the price is comparable to netflix. But it is really hard to justify paying for a show like the "Office" when I can just watch it for free on the network or wait 6 months and catch it when it comes out on DVD....

It's really sad though... They always have to ruin a good thing....


tculv   October 24th, 2009 9:20 pm ET

This is a huge mistake by the corporate head of HULU. Many will leave and go elsewhere, there is more freesites out there.
As for those that complain about a thirty second commercial boohoo, its better than watching 2 minutes of them. Your watching your favorite shows online for free when you want, not when major networks want you to watch.
If Hulu is going to start charging, then we may as well join netflix, they have an array of newly released movies online, along with tv series for only 9 bucks a month.
I enjoy watching Hulu, because it is free even if i didn't have cable in which i don't, neither sat. I could still watch tv for free so why charge a service when its already aired for free through air waves waiting for my digital box to pull it in.


stephenedwardsnyc   October 24th, 2009 9:26 pm ET

Better solutions: (1) Once-a-year subscription fee and eliminate ads during shows/movies. One add at beginning and end are acceptable. (2) Offer some cool merchandise along with membership like PBS does each year. Most consumers aren't opposed to fair compensation to companies offering great products. Consumers are getting fed up with businesses' trickery and deception in all aspects of consumerism.


Alex   October 24th, 2009 9:33 pm ET

Part of their huge success is the fact that it IS free, otherwise it's just another online TV show service.

Boo!


Joe   October 24th, 2009 9:46 pm ET

I think this is a big mistake from Hulu. They were doing a good job on offering what consumers wanted and allowing them to consume it where they wanted it.

They got out infront of the problem that Youtube caused them by actually offering a real alternative to allow consumers to still consume the programming they wanted. Consumers watch the ads and it catches them up on past episodes from the season to allow them to watch it on primetime. If they start charging it will undo all the good they did. This announcement has done a lot to kill my excitement for hulu.

I have been telling friends about my experience canceling my cable (They already lay the networks over and charge both networks and consumers to offer the premium programming...and given this economy and the cost it makes sense to cancel) and where I go to view my tv shows which has been Hulu.

I also saw Hulu as the best chance the networks had of keeping the content in their hands while allowing consumer to change viewing habits. Given this move it seems they are more aligned with the music studios and movie studios then I thought.


Tycho   October 24th, 2009 9:50 pm ET

lol bye bye Hulu

If they want to make a smart move they'll keep it free but allow people that pay to view it without commercials. No one's going to give them money if they have to pay AND put up with crappy commericals.


steven   October 24th, 2009 10:34 pm ET

it's sick to see fox ruin hulu.

it's so young and has improved so much over its short life, but their greed is blinding them from what makes hulu great, and different.

i will migrate away from hulu if they go through with trying to make people pay for it. hulu made it possible for me to watch all my shows without owning a tv for the last two years....for any and every other college student like myself this was great. the site has reached 3rd place in the US for time spent on the site b/c its able to reach out to demographics like college students.

the only success fox will see by doing this is the successful killing of hulu. people will watch the shows on the specific show's network's site, or fancast, or the many quasi-legal alternatives...so way to acknowledge and respect a good thing when you've got it, fox.

gooooo http://www.fancast.com!


Red_Hatorade   October 24th, 2009 11:41 pm ET

Go ahead and charge. That just means that I will resort back to the millions of services that offer the same thing for FREE.


john34   October 24th, 2009 11:49 pm ET

I will be done with HULU the very first time I am asked to pay for a show I could just as easily record on the dvr. The only reason I use HULU is that it is convenient for listening to new tv shows while i play games or answer email on the pc. What possible incentive could there be to pay for something with commercials? In this period of personal budgetary cutbacks, do the braintrust running HULU really believe that families will shell out extra money for their service?


brandon   October 24th, 2009 11:51 pm ET

If hulu starts charging us to view their content, i will not pay and stop going to hulu. I'll just set my DVR/record a VHS. This will be the death of hulu.


tim   October 25th, 2009 12:00 am ET

get a DVR and never watch commercials again!!!!!!


cassandra   October 25th, 2009 12:04 am ET

was nice while it lasted hulu. im not paying for it f* that


mitty   October 25th, 2009 12:17 am ET

Hulu = free = good!
Hulu = not free = not good!
...... its as simple as that ;) lol :)


Jparenti   October 25th, 2009 1:23 am ET

Done! Bye, Hulu.
Now don't take me the wrong way, I don't feel that I'm entitled to free content forever. But television is free, since there's commercials to pay for it. If you want more options, there's satellite and cable (and still, commercials). Hulu does the same as normal broadcast television, but changes the arrangement to allow viewers to decide when THEY want to see the programming, instead of allowing the television schedule to dictate their consumption time.
What Hulu needs to do, if a profit needs to be turned, is something similar to what television itself has done: You have broadcast, which is free, and subscriptions services (cable and satellite), which offers more varied content.
If they start charging for everything, they'll see a good idea killed by greed. If they start charging, they'll lose what they already have from advertisers and be worse than when they started.


jbb   October 25th, 2009 1:32 am ET

iam a heavy hulu tv user and I will never pay for hulu. I would rather go back to a hulu alternative than pay money for the "privilege of watching commercial riddled television." If hulu did a subscription i would do cable or dvr or netflixs.


Mason   October 25th, 2009 2:23 am ET

With plenty of options for procuring entertainment/media using the Internet, all Hulu.com was to it's users was a convenience. Yes, they've built a useful and enjoyable service, but no, I don't think most people will start paying for it considering the number of other options they have available to them.

The minute Hulu wants me to open my wallet, I'm back to using other websites and methods to watch TV shows and movies.


Dushan   October 25th, 2009 3:42 am ET

If there were many new movies, then I might consider a subscription. But, so many of the movies are old, and I've seen many of the good ones. So, I don't see how they can justify a subscription if they don't offer some new material.

There is so much more out there then just old movies or tv reruns, and I don't think that I could be a subscriber. I've used Hulu very sparingly over the few years they've been operating. I check it out now and then, and if I don't find anything new or interesting, I just sign out, and 95% of the time, I just leave for other websites.


Kerri   October 25th, 2009 8:13 am ET

Wow, that's really not a fully vetted decision by Hulu. However, it is great for TiVo. :-)

Television is digital over the air.

Most of Hulu's shows are available for free over the air.

Get a TiVo (or make a Freevo, or get a TV tuner card and some software, or whatever), grab the shows out of the sky, and Hulu's history. The only reason people use it now is because it's free and convenient. If it stops being free, or stops being convenient, people will stop using it.


Faysal   October 25th, 2009 8:46 am ET

I agree with you all. Hulu doesn't need to be doing, better yet thinking about fees for full episodes of my favorite shows. I don't use Hulu that much, just only if i miss an episode. I also agree that if Hulu is going to charge to watch, remove the commercials so that most of us can stick to Hulu even if it means watching "Heroes" or "House" through several 30-second commercials. Otherwise, it would be a little similar to Xbox Live because they "force" the ads onto you even if you have a Gold subscription.


Amanda   October 25th, 2009 10:08 am ET

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Hulu just pulls down programming that is already available on the internet for free. Meaning that mostly the great thing about hulu is that I can find all the shows I want to see easily on one site. But, If I have to pay I will just go to the network sites to watch my favorite shows FOR FREE. Hulu was a cool and almost alternative brand (their "we are aliens commercials"), but if they start charging they are no different from any other money making scheme on the internet. If it is available for free, people won't pay for it. At least, I know I won't pay for it.


Jacob   October 25th, 2009 10:45 am ET

I got tired of paying almost $80 a month for cable with all the commercials. So I just canceled it entirely! I would be open to a Hulu subscription based service with no commercials. To even consider a subscription fee and shove commercials down our throats would be the equivalent of internet suicide for Hulu!


mike and sara   October 25th, 2009 11:08 am ET

RIP
Here Lies Hulu
2007-2009
Another Victim Of The Green Eyed Monster
You will be missed!


George   October 25th, 2009 11:11 am ET

Hulu seems to be missing the point that fee-based services cannot also run ads – it's one or the other.

And, given the prevailing attitude amongst consumers that "everything should be free", a subscription or fee-for-service model is doomed to failure.

Hopefuly, Hulu's Board is wiser than its management.


What I Learned from “What Would Google Do?” - No, I Am Not Writing A Novel   October 25th, 2009 11:24 am ET

[...] Being free is the new business model – Hulu announced recently that it will start charging for content. Bummer. Hulu should look closely at what Google has done. We don't pay for any Google [...]


Rob in LA   October 25th, 2009 11:31 am ET

I've discovered that Netflix streams over Xbox live for only $8.99. It's basically the same thing as Hulu. Granted there are a few shows that aren't on the netflix roster but i get to watch on my HD tv not my pc monitor.

Charging will most likely kill Hulu but if just a few hundred thousand of you pay for it, then they will most likely flourish.


B.D.Kuchera   October 25th, 2009 12:18 pm ET

I wrote about Hulu not long after it came out. It was great. Warning! You charge subscription for this and I think Hulu will be done over night.

There are tons of new site that will pop up that will behave like Hulu does now. Hulu has not made the mistake of subsciption yet.

I watch Hulu all the time. I will immediately stop if this happens. And, it's not out of punishment, it's simply that I can get subscribe to Netflix and get better content the same way with a deeper database.

Hulu is still special. Instead of ruining a great thing with this utterly stupid idea of subscription, why not continue out how to make money off commercials and internet banners. People will still come to Hulu in droves if they stay in that model and adapt with their branding without ever charging for subscription.

Hulu is just not that deep of a system to survive changing the vision. The users of Hulu use it because they respect that it's free. They really respect that, and do to this day as I write this article. But, one false move with subscription and it will immediately lose its luster.

Start looking at the migratory patters of internet users and social media. Myspace had a shelf life. Facebook is still thriving. But, Hulu will not survive if they undermine what internet users enjoy -getting clear, free content, with a willingness to look tolerate ads. Anything else and it's just t.v. we're being charged for.

Networks made their money off commercials my whole lifetime. T.V. was free. Keep Hulu that way and it will survive for a long long time. You flip the vision on this Internet generation and they're gone. I'll be one of the first to leave.

Come on, Hulu...you matter. Don't screw us all over with your limited perspective on how to make money. You made a powerful brand. You're about to destroy it.

I will literally get a subscription to Netflix online the second they flip over.


Ken   October 25th, 2009 12:28 pm ET

No Pay! No Pay!


Nathan   October 25th, 2009 12:29 pm ET

No way I pay for their current offering. They only have a few shows from one particular season of a show available to watch. I still have to watch commercials – maybe I would consider subscription if it eliminated the commercials – but even then it is unlikely because the content is not comprehensive and for now I still have to sit down in a chair in front of my computer screen to watch it. The other annoying thing is that when I have it in full screen mode, if try to do anything on my second monitor it changes to window view on my primary monitor, which makes it annoying when I am trying to watch Stargate: Universe, while also programming doing my homework.


Jim   October 25th, 2009 12:34 pm ET

evil profiteers! how dare they think that they should be able to pay their rent, feed their kids, etc! stinking capitalists! they should work for free.


Dave   October 25th, 2009 12:39 pm ET

I will not pay for Hulu. I too no longer have cable and get all my television over the Net. I think that if Hulu becomes a cable company using the Net for delivery, someone else will step up to fill their shoes that is not that worried about maximizing profits, but wants a fair profit. I can't imagine Hulu is not profitable by now.

Hulu should start to offer a movielink.com rental business for all movies at $1.00 a movie, something less cost than Blockbuster is doing. Blockbuster has to pay for all that expensive real estate, hulu doesn't.

Hulu, stay free (with commercials) for the content like you have now and start to rent us cheap movies. Add more movies with commercials and give us a chance to rent them without commercials, don't go subscription.

If you do the math on the comments here on this article, your viewers will plummet if you go subscription based only.


Granville G   October 25th, 2009 1:30 pm ET

Viewer base drives ad revenue. Free access with good content brings viewers.

Paid access will drive away viewers. Charging viewers but dropping ads will keep some viewers who would otherwise leave.

Can Hulu add enough value to their current service to attract moire viewers?

If Hulu charges viewers enuf to make up for no ads, more viewers will leave – unless there is significant value added and the charges are very low – MAYBE!.

Does Hulu have good econometricians? A good model to play with? An example to study (like Napster)?

Hulu's idea sounds like taking a valuable land animal (like a cow) and throwing it into the middle of the ocean to see if it can also catch fish.


Yash   October 25th, 2009 1:48 pm ET

Sure hulu,

If you charge fees then we will have to find someone else...
Common hulu, you know there are 500 other competitors out there!

the day you start charging – Good Bye!


David   October 25th, 2009 2:23 pm ET

I love Hulu. It gives me a chance to catch up on shows and movies. However, if they start charging, I will definitely go somewhere else.
Isn't there enough revenue from those commericals?

Thanks Hulu. Hope you come to your senses.


RD   October 25th, 2009 2:30 pm ET

You know what makes me so angry at all this? How the entertainment industry continues to get paid year over year over year after a show has already been produced, work has been completed and the actor/actress has moved on. And we the little people do our 9 – 5 job and stop getting paid if we stop working. We don't get royalties for our ideas, our work, our presentations, our "creativity" in helping the company save money, etc.... so why should the entertainment world be so different? Or maybe the everyday Joe should start to get royalties too! I think they should cut folks a break and stop the madness of penny pinching people to death. I don't mind the commercials and actually click on and view those that are interesting – which is more than I do for what I see on TV (I just fast forward with a DVR). That is why I like Redbox – $1 movies – that way I'm not "overpaying" the entertainment world. And although Hulu did introduce me to shows I never saw on TV....I'm not going to pay for it first to find them. I'm coming real close to canceling my TV service and keeping more money in my pocket and go back to "rabbit ears" for over the air HD and just live w/a few channels. Maybe the Internet will be next for me. I could sure store a lot of extra dough if I didn't have all these "services".


rick   October 25th, 2009 3:25 pm ET

Dear HULU,
Please dont lose site of the fact your immense popularity is based on - the fact you are FREE - Remember what happens to pigs - they get slaughtered..
chk this site - scary our alternatives

http://www.ovguide.com


steven   October 25th, 2009 3:36 pm ET

American Business people are only good at being greedy and they think they are smart because they see a way to make big $$; they don't know that being greedy only work for a while. That is American!.. so be it.


JC   October 25th, 2009 3:37 pm ET

I'd pay a buck a month .. otherwise I might as well get cable ...


mateo   October 25th, 2009 3:39 pm ET

That sucks. Perhaps they can add an extra commercial instead? I definitely wont be paying for this service when there are so many other options for watching video content. Good luck Hulu.


Robert   October 25th, 2009 4:04 pm ET

Why are people so lame? Where does it say that they are considering charging *AND* playing commercials?

I'm surprised they haven't started charging already. Does anyone have any idea what the storage and bandwidth costs to host and stream these shows to people all over the U.S.?

Cheapskates.


Shain   October 25th, 2009 4:42 pm ET

Hulu's nice, but it's not worth paying for. It's really just that simple.

I'd be more likely to donate voluntarily for bonuses, like Pandora. However, there is simply no chance that I'd pay for Hulu.


Brad   October 25th, 2009 5:55 pm ET

Hulu any time. for free?


Jules   October 25th, 2009 6:48 pm ET

I just got back into watching scripted television when it is run, due to Hulu. I had quit Comcast, since I only watch like 3-4 hours a week and it just wasn't worth their BS. I mean if I'm going to pay, I might as well get the FiOS connection and forget internet viewing altogether. At least then I'll have something faster than DSL.

And at least the Hulu player is nice, as compared to that stupid Move Networks Media plug-in thing that ABC and CW and others use. It won't download or patch half the time.


atila   October 25th, 2009 7:08 pm ET

It is time for Google to buy them. At least Google understands the value of advertising.


Maxwell Morgan   October 25th, 2009 8:43 pm ET

I use Hulu probably five times a week. I am a college student and rely on it to watch shows I miss while in class or doing other things. I won't afford to be able to use Hulu once they start charging.


elle   October 25th, 2009 9:20 pm ET

if they charge, I will not use the service. I don't mind the commercials at all during the shows. Would rather have a few mins of commercials than pay. Nope, they will lose me


Katherine   October 25th, 2009 10:16 pm ET

Wow, a lot of whining going on. I love how everyone feels that this service should be provided to them for free. Aren't we just an entitled bunch.

I think charging is a great idea and I for one, will be paying.


Rich   October 25th, 2009 10:58 pm ET

At present hulu functions as an online DVR, if you missed one of the shows they run. The movies they show are ancient and "B" list at best. Other sites are available with better and more current movies. If I'm going to spend money for TV shows, I'll go with iTunes. Their selection is is fairly wide and I pay for only what I want. Perhaps, hulu could go the iTunes route but charge less...though that is not likely to happen.


Domenic   October 25th, 2009 11:01 pm ET

I'm with Travis, I'll just go back to torrenting. Thought they actually had something good going. The commercials on TV are ridiculous and they're ridiculous on hulu but I'd take hulu commercials are tv commercials. This country's being turned into a bunch of consumer whores eventually the only thing that will be on is a commercial.


Dave   October 25th, 2009 11:03 pm ET

I'm living on a very limited budget. I can't afford Cable AND Broadband (I have RR-Lite). HULU is (was?) the only way I could see many of the shows I like. Oh well... Guess I'll be searching for alternate ways also.


Ellen   October 26th, 2009 12:00 am ET

Want FREE original content? Watch STRIKE.TV – the online network featuring funny, offbeat and original content videos made with cubicle inmates in mind! STRIKE.TV offers serialized shows written by members of the Screenwriters' Guild of America including Emmy winners with credits that include Ugly Betty, The Office and other TV hits. These segments were produced by the writers themselves, as a result of the writers' strike. Warning, they're addictive. Average run time: 3-5 minutes each.


steven   October 26th, 2009 12:27 am ET

BYE BYE Hulu! I won't be paying for Hulu. I think that is a completely stupid move.


Charles   October 26th, 2009 12:44 am ET

Maybe Hulu execs will read all the comments on the internet and understand what will happen if they charge. I have been a loyal Hulu viewer since Day 1, I signed up for invitation before they went online for everyone and waited over a month to even gain access - I tell at least 2 people per day about Hulu. I visit Hulu on a daily basis - BUT I WILL NOT PAY A DIME! Advertisers should pay – just like they do on the major networks. The shows that I watch on Hulu are free on TV, so why should I pay? I would pay TIVO and watch on larger screen before I would pay Hulu to watch on computer - or I will just use the bit torrents. The general public is sick of the greedy execs of this country, so go ahead and charge - It will be the beginning of the END OF HULU. And don't think there won't be another FREE site come along to take Hulu's place. Goodbye to Hulu!


dale   October 26th, 2009 12:59 am ET

BYE BYE HULU, Ummmm lets see you reap money from ads on your web page, and uh O yes lots of money from commercials.

And NOW you want me to pay Ha, Ha , Ha.


Tony   October 26th, 2009 2:06 am ET

I'd be really interested to see the data they have that suggests anyone would pay for the service they provide in its current form. It would need to be drastically altered to be worth even $50 / year. Most of the content outside of the full length TV episodes is pretty crappy. All these TV stations have their own website with literally all the same clips and full episodes anyway. Why would anyone pay some middle man for content they are already paying the actual providers for? Fancast seems like a better service to begin with...


Jackie   October 26th, 2009 2:25 am ET

It is doubtful that many people will pony up a subscription fee for Hulu– I know I won't. Especially since most networks offer the same episodes in high quality on their own websites (for shows that are currently on air)

It reminds me of Napster in the good 'ol days: it was free, wonderful, everyone used it, they didn't even need to advertise. But now that they charge for it, it is completely out of fashion.


cceaf   October 26th, 2009 3:09 am ET

I am Watch many contains of Hulu last 2yrs from Afghanistan via International lease line to USA. But I have no intension to pay to Hulu to watch the TV series ....I can just go for too many other free sites.


Joel   October 26th, 2009 4:54 am ET

I think Hulu is wonderful. I use it constantly because my life only allows me to watch TV at random hours and would have a hard time keeping up with shows if not for Hulu. I think the current set up is perfect. I will gladly listen to 1-3 minutes of commercials to watch a 42min show, but would not be very interested in paying for that service. Going from a free service that has attracted a lot of fans to a paid service is sorta a slap in the face. If it is really a do or die situation for hulu, I would consider a one time charge for services a possibility, but I highly doubt they are strapped for cash. Hulu will make a lot more money advertising if they make their free service the gold standard online. I hope this is just a ploy to get more attention.


Confused   October 26th, 2009 7:35 am ET

Yes I am sad Hulu will start charging. BUT:

1) Why is everyone so mad, thinking that they are now entitled to free TV? Is it really HULU that is greedy, or are we greedy thinking we deserve this amazing service with no charge?

2) Several people have mentioned that they will not pay and watch commercials. I found that funny because everyone that pays for cable without DVR pays and watches the commercials.


HuluUser8989   October 26th, 2009 7:59 am ET

Goodbye Hulu! If you charge, I am gone.


Paul   October 26th, 2009 8:02 am ET

Working in the digital content distribution industry I can tell you that right now there is no way Hulu is profitable as a standalone business covering the overhead of the bandwdith fees and content encoding an ingestion. Money is pouring into the company from somewhere to sustain it. So I understand why they might consider a subscription model.

If they simply put a subscription fee in front of the existing service they are dead in the water pure and simple. The existing internet consumer will not stand for it as long as there are other easy to find alternatives. Even if we have to deal with lower quality video, download before viewing, frequent buffering, and the stigma of being a "pirate" it is better then paying for Hulu as it is now.

Two subscription models that would work are:
1) Small ($10/month or less) subscription fee to remove commercials
2) Subscription fee to gain access to premium content which must include new releases from the major movie studios (Warner, Sony, Paramount, NBC Universal, and Disney)


Kevin   October 26th, 2009 8:17 am ET

As history of the Internet has shown, the moment a website starts charging for service, the users just go somewhere else(downloads, torrents, rars; etc). It happened with music and its also happen with movies. Hulu may have a few "customers", after the fact, but the fact remains that many come to the net to watch shows at their own preference for the cost of the service of the internet. People don't want to subscribe for sites, especially something that is already shown on cable...Stupid. Time Warner's bulk of services has it arranged to where its actually more economical to have both cable and internet, rather than just having a single service, so who in their right mind would pay for a service that they are already getting. Not to mention the same thing happened to the music industryand movie industry and look where they are now, losing sales to "illegal" downloads. I hope the shows that are shown on Hulu don't agree with this, unless they want to see less people watching....


Slackman   October 26th, 2009 8:50 am ET

Well this sucks, they will lose my loyalness...Nothings free anymore, and subscribing online is so bogus now a days.... I wont be subscribing, just fin the same show for free on another website.


Robin Hood   October 26th, 2009 8:56 am ET

I use Hulu all the time. Put a fee on it and I'm gone...


Wayne   October 26th, 2009 8:59 am ET

worst idea EVER that Hulu could do. HULU is amazing as is. Keep it that way!


James   October 26th, 2009 9:08 am ET

I was not happy to hear this: I love Hulu, and I've always thought it was a pretty fair trade-off: watch some commercials to see free TV shows, just like most channels on TV.

I doubt this will be good for Hulu, but I would actually consider paying for it, if the service got better instead of worse. For example: less ads (I could deal with one at the beginning if I were paying, but probably not more), more selection, and re-working their contracts to allow them to post more episodes at once, and so on. Most importantly, they would need to stop showing so many things on a one-week delay.


Sammi   October 26th, 2009 9:11 am ET

I absolutely will not pay for Hulu. That would make it a second class Netflix, in my opinion.


Saumya   October 26th, 2009 9:13 am ET

No way .... no payment ....
Can only spare some time to watch commercials for the service.
Hulu, be more innovative to cash in your service ..... just look at the service model of Google.....


pay hater   October 26th, 2009 10:14 am ET

I agree. I will NOT pay for any Hulu subscription. I will just find other free TV outlets or just read a book from the FREE library for entertainment. Hulu survives because it is free. I also plan on dropping satellite TV when my contract expires next year. Things are getting out of hand regarding entertainment charges. Enjoy some peace and quiet for a change.


joshua   October 26th, 2009 10:37 am ET

well, bye bye hulu.


Matt   October 26th, 2009 10:57 am ET

I understand charging for premium content, not broadcast content. I already pay to watch The Office on TV, so don't charge me for that. However, if you bring some of your old popular series and movies out of the vault for on demand use, you can charge for that. Or if you offer a live sports package of games not being shown on the TV. That is understandable.


Joe   October 26th, 2009 11:03 am ET

The one thing most people on here aren't realizing is that all the networks allow their shows on hulu, most likely if hulu started charging the networks would too because hulu is a joint venture between NBC, ABC and FOX. The only one not on hulu is CBS who is changing their format to only allow new shows to air online 5 days after the air on their prime time schedule.

That isn't to say they should start charging for the hulu service. Hulu should remain free and just ad supported, especially since a lot of advertisers are starting to put real money into hulu ads.

They should get rid of the pharma ads on hulu, they are just too long.


Justin   October 26th, 2009 11:13 am ET

Not a chance. I already pay for cable, I'm not going to charge myself twice for access to the same thing.


Bryan Shields   October 26th, 2009 11:36 am ET

I have Netflix, internet, and antenna TV. I use Hulu daily and will stop using it if there are fees involved. Is Hulu not making enough on marketing ads? I will just access the shows I watch from the individual channel sites like nbc.com, fox.com, etc.


CFish   October 26th, 2009 11:38 am ET

Hmmm. Money Grab? -Yes. Success? -Nope. BIG OL FAIL!!!

HULU will join the ranks of all the other failed sites who grabbed for cash.

And imagine after you paid all that money for a Super Bowl commercial last year.

Suck much?- Yes.


Ben Mulligan   October 26th, 2009 11:42 am ET

While i do in fact agree entirely that paying for Hulu is out of the question, I was wondering about on other point.

The internet audience is remarkably resourceful and will find ways to watch what they want for free. Hulu needs to take into consideration the indirect competition that the internet itself provides. People will not be switching to other brands of streams but instead to other means of obtaining it. It is the small non-profiteering web sites that will win out.

So Hulu, watch out for your indirect competitors as I am sure they are delighted that you will start charging


Tesla Boy   October 26th, 2009 11:52 am ET

Hulu pays nothing for its used content. It splits the ad revenue with those sources supplying the programs. It adds no value to those products and it was pre-financed by existing media conglomerates.

Its startup was well-funded by NewsCorp and NBC-Universal (now NBC-Vivendi) who brought Sony and MGM into the mix. They attempted to garner market from Youtube and Google but offered no original or alternate media. It was a mainstream mix aimed at self-promotion of NBC, Fox, and some cable content. The old movie catalog, third tier filler is simultaneously being used to flesh out local broadcaster's digital channels like RTN. These parents carried its cost as a loss leader to draw audience to their current broadcasts. Hulu is a promotional adjunct to existing businesses, not a lone going concern. Their entire operation is one big ad, soft-promoting its parentage.

A significant portion of its initial capitalization was earmarked for exclusive use as ad dollars on its parents' flagship networks. When they placed ads in space costing others around $2.5 million per 60 second spot on last February's Super Bowl, their company value sank accordingly. More was "spent" on additional ad space over the next month.

Hulu doesn't seem to understand where or what they are. Broadcasters on the "Interweb" see click-through metrics as their single comparative advantage over traditional TV. The competitors they sought to eclipse have a much stronger sense of what they're doing and how to do it.

Convergent media is a gestalt, producing a result larger than the sum of its component parts. Amateurs, no matter how well funded, just don't get that. Plans to charge what users they have for their inborn failings only heightens that failure - their viewers are smarter than they are, when it comes to the Internet (as demonstrated by the prior 300+ postings above).


Kobe   October 26th, 2009 12:15 pm ET

R.I.P. Hulu.


Kristin   October 26th, 2009 12:22 pm ET

So sorry to hear about this! I got hooked on Hulu with Dr. Horrible, and have been using it ever since. No way would I pay anything while there are commercials. I might consider paying a SMALL fee for no commericals, if there were more variety of new shows and more good movies. Hulu could compete with netflix if they are able to charge similar fees, and skip the whole waiting for things to be delivered bit. I also like the watch-with-commercials-free, or pay-to-skip-commercials idea.


Kevin   October 26th, 2009 12:29 pm ET

I will not pay either. Good By HULU


Joe   October 26th, 2009 12:45 pm ET

Where Hulu is really missing the boat is the fact that adding a pay wall is only going to cause headaches for the consumers. Additionally they will need a reason to pay for another place to watch the content they already pay for.

They pay currently in a number of ways (viewing commercials/paying cable/satellite/risking lawsuits by torrenting the files) and putting up a pay wall is taking 3 steps back from what Hulu already was evolving into. It will push consumers more into DVRs which is time shifting the shows they already aren't watching in prime time and just delaying what consumers will shift towards and hulu was becoming "on demand viewing"

Overall it is a mistake to charge people for subscribers and if anything hulu is doing a great job at hurting their real competition and annoyance, the cable companies. Taking a play from their playbook isn't a smart move, really does anyone like the cable companies? Anyone?

They have mini monopolies (yeah there are a few of them but they have monopolies on specific markets), poor customer service (check out some youtube clips), a major superiority complex that they can do no wrong and horrible service (see where the US ranks globally for internet speeds and customer satisfaction)

Cable companies are the 2nd big monopolies allowed by our governments and in many ways very similar to health care.

So why would anyone take a play from their playbook?


oceanorange   October 26th, 2009 1:27 pm ET

I have just recently discovered hulu.com. but I would not pay even if there was no commercials. I would just use my dvr more which I already pay for and skip through the commercials.


Matt   October 26th, 2009 1:41 pm ET

I love how the minute someone wants to charge for a service, it's perceived as greed in today's uber-liberal america. Oh it must be corporate fat cats....HEY MORONS! How do you think they will pay for the hourly guys who maintain the site and pay the content and hosting? If everyone keeps looking for the free alternative you will always have crap, and eventually there just won't be a free alternative because the money trickle down that eventually gets to content creators won't be getting paid and you will have crap content like the person above who mentioned strike.tv


Will   October 26th, 2009 1:52 pm ET

Currently on Hulu I can watch the last couple shows for free in exchange for having very targeted advertising coming at me. I am happy to sit through this barge of focused advertisement because I'm not paying anything for the service. However I don't think they can make a fee based system that would still keep me as a consumer. If I need to pay for this service I'll either watch the shows on TV or get Netflix.

That said, Hulu would be stupid not to offer special services for a subscription fee. Offer people to ability to have no commercials, see more than the trailing 5 episodes of their favorite shows, and the ability to watch newer movies in exchange for a subscription. As it stands now Hulu has a bunch of accountants telling them their best move is to shoot themselves in the foot.

On the plus side, if Hulu is foolish enough to try this it may very well mean that in a couple years we will have Google give us the experience of "Classic Hulu".


Tony   October 26th, 2009 2:23 pm ET

OMG, I think the entire HULU userbase just posted a comment on this article LOL. Well HULU, atleast you can save yourself the money of hiring some hoity toity firm to assess the viablity of charging people for your service. Your users have already spoken up. So squash the idea, stick to your business model and make it work. People aren't willing to pay when they can give the cable company 10 bucks more a month for a DVR converter box and record all the shows they want. They also aren't going to pay when there is an endless number of free websites which will just fill your shoes should you choose not to play nice anymore. If that fails then its on to the bit torennts. In other words you guys are in a sweet spot right now, don't make the mistake of thinking people can't do without you.


Daniel Roberts   October 26th, 2009 2:32 pm ET

So... let us all not just complain; lets help each other out

from what I gathered – here are free alternatives to Hulu

IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER GOOD FREE VIDEO SITES PLEASE LIST THEM

crackle.com
fancast.com
hulu.com
veoh.com
entertainment.att.net/tv
youtube.com
JOOST.com


Johnny SD   October 26th, 2009 5:02 pm ET

It's obvious no one will pay for hulu if they continue to play commercials. My guess is that the shows will come through commercial free. I use hulu from time to time now if I missed a show I like, usually "The Daily Show." I would not pay for hulu even if it were free because I can just watch clips on comedycentral.com

Today we have more bills than ever before. Cell phone, internet, & cable bills are all new and very expensive. We can all easily spend $100 a month on these necessities that did not exist a few years ago.


Pertigal   October 26th, 2009 5:59 pm ET

Here's a complete list of all the alternative sites mentioned in the above posts but folks, REMEMBER, THEY ARE NOT CHARGING FOR THE EXISTING SERVICE.

crackle.com
joost.com
tv.com
entertainment.att.net/tv
veoh.com
bittorrent.com
crackle.com
fancast.com
surfthechannel.com
ovguide.com
strike.tv
youtube.com


JR   October 26th, 2009 6:41 pm ET

It is an amusing idea because most all the shows that matter are updated on their parent affiliations websites. The stuff that isn't is old shows and old movies.


Joel   October 26th, 2009 7:25 pm ET

I can see it being charged, if they yank the commercials, then I am totally down with this. Hell if they upped the availability of the plethora of movies and shows out there, I would gladly pay for it.... screw net flicks, and cable, gimme a 57" monitor screen though.


Mitch   October 26th, 2009 10:59 pm ET

Yeah I will definitely not pay. I will go somewhere else.


Allen   October 26th, 2009 11:57 pm ET

Pirate Bay!

I haven't used it in a while primarily because of Hulu. Oh well...


Dan   October 27th, 2009 3:19 am ET

What a bunch of whiney crybabies. Why would you expect everything to be free? Maybe you should get up off your lazy asses and stop watching so much tv anyway. I personally like the ability to watch the shows I like whenever I have the free time. I'm sticking with HULU. All you crybaby cheap asses go back to downloading your movies and porn illegally.


Kasado   October 27th, 2009 1:29 pm ET

Hulu is mostly just a clearing house that redirects requests to a cable network source. I seldom use it and find it easier just to go directly to the network source.


Phil   October 27th, 2009 1:40 pm ET

Hulu needs to tailor their ads to the user. I do not need tampons. They should make you sign up for an account, and choose your interests. I would much rather see ads for video games, sports gear, hunting equipment, movies, computer hardware etc...

Nope, I'm stuck with tampons and dove soap. wtf?

P.S. Dan who posted at 3:19 - GFY


Brian   October 27th, 2009 2:01 pm ET

There is no way I would pay for Hulu...its a great service as is, but I already have a cable bill, I do not need two.


Tim   October 27th, 2009 2:02 pm ET

So, I'm somewhere in the middle of the users and the company. Preferably, I'd rather see 2 commercials in the breaks than pay a fee. But what kind of fee are we talking about here? A fee to enter the site? That's not good. You have to give something away for free so that new users can see the site and how it works. Maybe make it more stringent. How about this timeline:

1) Airdate – Live on TV
2) 2 weeks where it is ad-supported for free
3) 5 additional weeks where it is available to subscribers with no ads
4) Bulk of movies & retro shows available to subscribers only, but need occasional free ad-supported examples.

What is an appropriate price to pay for a subscription with the model above? $5.00 a month? After thinking about it while writing this, I think my threshold for the above model would be $5.99 a month.


Jon   October 27th, 2009 2:59 pm ET

Guess if they charge they can be called "Hulu-hooped" as they will sit and spin w/o me.. I use it a lot but not for a fee.. isn't that what advertisers are for.. I mean honestly 4-6 ad's per show and you want more.. Too bad.. another good I dea gone bad due to greed..


John   October 27th, 2009 3:26 pm ET

I will not pay a dime for Hulu, not a dime.


Kevin   October 27th, 2009 3:49 pm ET

Hulu Who!
Charging for content that is available on Major TV Networks, DVD, Netflix, Cable TV and about twenty other sites like casttv.com is the death of this website.

Good Job Idiots


David   October 27th, 2009 4:10 pm ET

OK, so let me make sure I understand this correctly. Hulu has shows and movies that, most of which, I can watch on TV, on their website for free. And now not only are they including commercials, but also are turning it into a pay subscription service. So basically I will be PAYING to watch what I could see FOR FREE on TV. Apparently they are partaking of their own product, 'cause their brains must be turned to goo if they think anybody is actually going to go for this deal. Bucketheads!


dornandrew   October 27th, 2009 10:10 pm ET

Hey News Corp. Deputy Chairman Chase Carey,

I am guessing you are letting Hulu users know about this now to see their reactions so...

I just read back about a hundred comments and all i can say is:

Good luck with that!


Rute   October 27th, 2009 11:45 pm ET

I enjoy the convinince of downloading the TVs that I enjoy. The service is not free – we watch the comercials and provide feedback, this is valuable for advertisers (marketing research). Hulu knows that if they were to charge a fee, most of their customers won't pay, because there are alternatives. Also if Hulu would charge, they would have less viewers, if their audiences go down, brands, won't invest in advertising in Hulu.

The concept it is brilliant and they will be here to stay!


Adam G.   October 28th, 2009 6:27 am ET

Goodbye, Hulu, we hardly knew ye.


jason   October 28th, 2009 11:58 am ET

i've been on hulu for several years now and i kind of can't wait to delete their link from my favorites. i watch the damn commercials and i'm sure they get paid alright, they just want more. hulu just signed it's own death warrant. how much money will that bring in next quarter?


Gary   October 28th, 2009 12:25 pm ET

I certainly won't pay for Hulu. There are plenty of other options out there.

It is interesting that Mr. Carey doesn't feel a "free" ad supported service is the right model to get the the value for his content. Isn't that the exact same model broadcast TV stations use now? (and the model much of the content was created for).

With the popularity of DVR's, he should be pushing a service that actually makes us watch ads.


Travis   October 28th, 2009 12:29 pm ET

It really all depends on what they are offering for the money. For instance, I can watch a show free on tv, but I can't choose which episode to watch like on Hulu. However, the whole "5 episode max" they have on all the new shows is not something I'd put up with if I were paying a fee.

Also, I wouldn't pay a fee if I had to watch these shows with commercials. I don't have cable right now because I don't want to spend the money on watching tv with commercials, and I'm definitely not going to do it online either. Get rid of the commercials and I'd be happy.

I hope they release more information on this soon. I'd be willing to pay a fee but they have some changes to do before actually adding 'value' to a paid subscription.


Andrew   October 28th, 2009 12:35 pm ET

If they're going to do this then they should have two kinds of options. The free option, which is exactly the way it is now, or the pay option which provides you with much more content and no commercials. It would be like any other site that offers a regular and premium membership. This way you keep the people you already have but hopefully get some more income by offering some incentives to pay.


Jim   October 28th, 2009 12:41 pm ET

Another mistake about to be made for the almighty dollar. Bye Bye Hulu!!! Lost me as a supporter!


Chris   October 28th, 2009 12:45 pm ET

Hulu can take a hike if they do this.

The content is FREE over the air and everyone can record them, strip the commercials, etc.

By using Hulu I make sure they get ad revenue. Not only that, they get to have some idea about our household and our location so they can target the ads.

Give me a break. The cost of running Hulu should decrease over time as bandwidth and storage costs are going down. If the entertainment companies want a premium they will have to go to a freemium subscription model where they charge for the non-free OTA content....or they remove the ads.


Dan   October 28th, 2009 12:59 pm ET

If Hulu is going to go to a subscription service, everyone should just move to Netflix. I think Netflix realized the competition from Hulu and is now getting new episodes of TV shows up on their website for pull on their "Instant Queue" within a day or two after they air on television.

Not only are there no commercials with this (since you're paying the subscription service for Netflix), but you can link up a Netflix-ready device (such as an Xbox 360, PS3, or some Blu-Ray players or maybe even DVD players) and be able to "Watch It Now" with Netflix on your television. Definitely beats buying cables and new PCI cards for your PC to hook up to your televsion, not to mention moving your PC to the living or even buying one.

I already have Netflix so I don't use Hulu anymore, and it's definitely the way to go. And not only can you watch TV shows through the Instant Queue, but there are a number of movies you can watch through it (definitely not all, and they tend to be older and not the high-budget and/or high-acclaim movies). And then on top of all this, you still would get the traditional mail service for DVDs that Netflix got famous for.

Go for Netflix if Hulu starts to charge.


Rolland   October 28th, 2009 1:09 pm ET

I for one would pay, thats right!

I will tell you why!

I was in love with Prison Break. The problem I had was that it would come on when I was still at work, or I would watch tv and the reception here at fort polk, louisiana was so bad that I could not enjoy the show. Add to the fact that I hate the commercials for locals here.

With HULU, I was able to watch the shows the very next morning, in FULL HD, something that my cable company doesnt offer here, with minimal interruptions, on my computer. I love this!

HULU, you have my full support, I will pay to stay!


Illiterate Fool   October 28th, 2009 1:14 pm ET

This is the greatest thing to evar habben!! Now I can be constructive and read a book


David   October 28th, 2009 1:16 pm ET

Way to go Hulu! Your eloquent words don't mean squat.

“I think a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content. I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value. Hulu concurs with that, it needs to evolve to have a meaningful subscription model as part of its business.”

What a load of crap. I used to work at a newspaper that did VERY well as a free site. The entire production was paid for a hundred times over just with the advertising sold. THEN, our corporate headquarters stepped in with their greedy little paws and WRECKED everything we worked for by charging outrageous prices to our customers to view and put ads in the online addition.

Hulu, you need to take a step back and look at what happened to the New York Times, Washington Post and other sites that tried what you are about to do. IT DIDN'T WORK! YOU WILL LOSE YOUR READER BASE, GUARANTEED!

Take it from someone who knows. Greed only works if its for the benefit of your customers.


Doni   October 28th, 2009 1:19 pm ET

Being free, at least they can show commercials related to the show contents... for example: My son watches a cartoon, a commercial comes on about makeup, and my son is not a girl, so why the commercial over and over? The mute button works great though.

Paying for the service should remove the commercials, since I am not paying to watch commercials, period.

Hulu, good luck maintaining your user base when you go to the subscription model!


Scot   October 28th, 2009 1:20 pm ET

Hulu...if you do that....we'll we're breaking up.

Its not you, it's me....OH WAIT...it WOULD be YOUR fault!

Horrible idea! I guess I'll put good use to my DVR


Corners   October 28th, 2009 1:21 pm ET

We don't have cable and use Hulu to watch a lot of shows (we use a Windows Media Center computer in the living room on a 47" LCD). The reason I don't have cable is because 1) HDTV is free over the air, 2) you can watch most things on the internet, and 3) cable TV has commercials, which I feel like a sucker PAYING to watch TV and they have to watch commercials on top of that. If Hulu starts charging, I'll just go to the network's websites and watch the shows there, FOR FREE. Again, paying AND watching commercials is for suckers, so why would I pay Hulu when I can go to the individual network's sites for free? The ONLY reason we use Hulu is it's convenient to have all the network shows in one place. I will not pay.


Scott   October 28th, 2009 1:23 pm ET

i want to be the one person for this....wait no i dont. dumb idea


Johan   October 28th, 2009 1:25 pm ET

Cya later Hulu. Time to Download/go to other sites

I bet crunchyroll loved to hear this.


Burnse   October 28th, 2009 1:27 pm ET

R.I.P Hulu


Corners   October 28th, 2009 1:27 pm ET

Oh, and I would consider paying for Hulu ( up to $10/mo) if they start offering FULL episodes, movies, and LIVE TV from premium and cable channels like HBO, Discovery, E!, Food, Nickelodeon, etc...


Michelle in VA   October 28th, 2009 1:27 pm ET

I agree with the previous comments. I currently view material on Hulu weekly, but if they move forward with their subscription services, I certainly will not join. They are making an enormous mistake and will lose customers. People will not pay to see material they are already paying for on cable. Once viewership drops dramatically, so will the advertising $$$ and Hulu will be out of business.


Jeannie   October 28th, 2009 1:30 pm ET

Hulu may have something there. We consumers are pretty stupid. For example, people will pay outrageous prices for shoes, apparel, etc. that have a designer label affixed so it is displayed for all to see.....which means the consumer pays too much and gives free advertising, too! Now that marketing idea was genius.


Paynotaxes   October 28th, 2009 1:34 pm ET

Bye Bye Hulu


jb   October 28th, 2009 1:54 pm ET

Oh come one, the free ride on the net can't last forever. Real question is how much will you pay. I don't use Hulu that much since the networks generally provide the shows I want to watch. I mean, you don't expect netflix to be free. i'd pay $5 a month to Hulu for "basic" service. Any more than that and I had have to start asking myself if I really need to watch more TV.


Lisa   October 28th, 2009 1:56 pm ET

I discovered HULU about 6 months ago. I think 90% of their content stinks. What I use it for is to watch my favorite new first-run TV shows when I want to. I would almost get rid of TV in favor of HULU if they added more current movies – why don't they partner with Netflix and just call the site FLIX – one stop shop? I'd pay a $5.99 per month fee to watch movies and TV shows at a one stop shop. Yeah I know TIVO offers Blockbuster & Netflix but it is way too cumbersome and you still have to watch via the TV set. I like watching on my laptop. If HULU goes away so do my plans to ditch the TV set – just when I was thinking of getting a flat screen.....guess I'll wait til I can afford an entire media wall.


Phyllis Charney   October 28th, 2009 1:58 pm ET

Stick a fork in Hulu: it's done as far as I'm concerned.
No WAY will I pay for it.


many people   October 28th, 2009 1:59 pm ET

Guess we will all just have to go back to bittorrent'ing. Guess I'll get a start on it now and download VUZE from http://www.vuze.com/

Have fun Hulu without all of us.


Patty   October 28th, 2009 2:05 pm ET

I will just make more of an effort to program my DVR in advance. I don't use it enough to pay for it.


ALS   October 28th, 2009 2:10 pm ET

Screw you Hulu. I'm not paying.


Edward H   October 28th, 2009 2:11 pm ET

If HULU starts to charge then I will just switch to Fancast. Why should I pay for shows that were free to start?


Jason from Hollywood CA   October 28th, 2009 2:18 pm ET

Me too – If Hulu wants us to pay – they'll have a major drop in traffic. The whole charm of the site is that you can watch what you want when you want.
We already have to watch the commercials, so the ads are being played.
If greed was the answer to everything we would have a stronger housing market.

Don't worry hulu, screw us – screw you. I guess we'll have to download the episodes or go back to watching them on the network.

TV and tv-related executives don't know what year they are living in. Plus – you're supposed to build your consumer base with a fee first – that way there's less of a sting. These guys are ass backwards and i'm not gonna use their site starting now. Torrents are where its at and where it will be. Or i'll stop watching the BS shows that most networks are putting on anyways.


Steph   October 28th, 2009 2:23 pm ET

"I think a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content. I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value.”

The reason I appreciate and value Hulu is because it offers it's content for free. If Hulu starts charging for it's services, forget it. I'd just try to catch my shows when they are broadcast or just not watch them at all.


Joshua   October 28th, 2009 2:27 pm ET

There is ZERO chance that I'll continue using Hulu if I have to pay AND continue to watch commercials. If they usher in a charge, they can usher me out as a patron.


BillG   October 28th, 2009 2:44 pm ET

Aloha! Hulu!

Reruns of 'free' TV and movies so old your dog's even quoting the lines, or so bad you need a seat belt to keep from running away.

No thanks.


Mark   October 28th, 2009 2:44 pm ET

Everything on Hulu is available elsewhere for free. Hulu just aggregates it in one convenient place. It's not that hard to do this yourself and all except the laziest people with money to throw away will choose to do this once Hulu starts charging.


Ed Waters   October 28th, 2009 2:45 pm ET

Gracie said "I'm waving goodbye to Hulu when they say they should charge money for their services. Greed is not cool."

Greed is not cool? take your own advice. How much in this life do you want for nothing? A typical out-of-touch-with-reality type who feels they are owed everything. You have a sense of entitlement over cartoons and silly TV programming? I suggest you throw away your television. It is a worthless, soul-sucking device that does the watcher absolutely NO good. Then, go get a job and learn what the real world is all about and get your head out of the boob-tube.


Hemlock   October 28th, 2009 2:46 pm ET

I love Hulu. I don't watch TV anymore (why are we still payong for cable? Oh yeah, football season). Unfortunately, most of what I watch on Hulu isn't available on broadcast TV (and I haven't watched NBC, ABC, or CBS, or Fox (other than football) in at least a year and a half.

If there's something my hubby wants to watch we DVR it, otherwise I watch the shows I want to see on Hulu. It's great when out in the field away from home.

I'd probably be willing to pay a minor subscription fee.

I don't mind the commercials that they have now, they are mercifully short, and in some instances funny/weird.


Mark   October 28th, 2009 2:59 pm ET

I love HULU.

Will I pay for it? You must be out of your mind if you think so.

You expect me to believe they're not making enough money from all the advertising? C'mon....


Lance   October 28th, 2009 3:05 pm ET

Ben Levy said (October 23rd, 2009 1:38 pm ET):

"I can see someone paying for this if they don't have cable, but how many people have broadband, but not cable?"

Here's one.

I am simply amazed at (or is it... horrified by?) the masses who believe they are entitled to everything they want for nothing in return.


DRO   October 28th, 2009 3:12 pm ET

I agree with the majority. I will not pay, but will look elsewhere.


elinny   October 28th, 2009 3:21 pm ET

wow. I enjoy several programs on hulu – and because it's free I watch and tolerate the commercials. On my regular tv, I only watch shows that I TIVO and bypass every single commercial. There's no way I'd pay for the ability to watch a tv show. As for movies, the most I'll pay is under $5 to rent it and download to my TIVO or laptop – and that is a very rare occasion. There's nothing on tv or in the movies worth subscribing for past my regular monthly cable bill. So if hulu decides to charge, they may as well join the ranks of the dead.coms..


jen blair   October 28th, 2009 3:26 pm ET

What? Charging for HULU!?! What am I going to do all day at work now that I can't watch all my favorite shows at my desk. I am NOT a happy hulu camper.


Erik   October 28th, 2009 3:28 pm ET

Hulu's best option if they want to do a subscription service would be to have it remove ads plus give access to past episodes. Right now episodes for some shows, mostly current ones, go up for a few weeks and then come down. They should continue doing that with their free model but add in the subscription model so that people can have full access to all past shows without ads for the subscription.


David   October 28th, 2009 3:34 pm ET

Why not get 0bama to bail them out? Then we can pay for it from our tax dollars. NOT!


jc   October 28th, 2009 3:39 pm ET

When cable first started in the 70's, it was billed as a subscriber-paid, commercial free alternative to the free, commercial-laden over-the-air tv stations. Over time (not that much time) commercials crept in and now cable is infested with them and we still have to pay.

This shows that no subscription service provider will turn down advertising dollars even when they charge. I'm willing to bet Hulu does the same. They may offer commercial-free subscriptions. But watch out! It won't be long after that when you'll have to pay to watch commercials on Hulu just like cable. At that point, Hulu will be no different.

So, CYA hulu


Taneka   October 28th, 2009 3:41 pm ET

I love Hulu, but I will not pay any fee for the web site, If I have to pay to watch a show with commercial interupptions that would be insane. Don't they make money off the comercials, why would they want to ruin a good thing. I hate the comercial interruptions but deal with it because the website is free. I will definetly find other means of watching my weekly shows I miss during the work week. Why would hulu mess with such a good thing.


jc   October 28th, 2009 3:43 pm ET

http://www.fancast.com/ is no alternative. It uses Hulu.


Andrew   October 28th, 2009 3:49 pm ET

Wow, I thought Hulu's plan was to turn my brain into a goo then suck it out. Seems to me that they have been watching too much of there own product. I will not pay for a service that also shows commercials. But maybe now I will open my own web media company and offer content for free so i can take all of the people who used to watch hulu.


Mark   October 28th, 2009 3:52 pm ET

How do these people have a job in the business world if they fail to realize one business truism: the vast majority of people WILL NOT pay for web content, and that's all Hulu really is. There's no product. You watch a video or two, and you're done.

I could go to a local costruction site and bag up some gravel and try to sell it for $50 a bag, but I don't think people would be buying that, either.

TV shows monetize through first run advertising and syndication rights. Anything they now get from Hulu is gravy. When they start charging, their site traffic will drop, their ad rates will plummet, and they won't even maintain their current revenue.


Brian   October 28th, 2009 3:58 pm ET

Profiteering pure and true...
The statement that the users need to appreciate the valie (by paying for it) is absolute nonsense.

HULU is dead if they charge even a dime!


Alfman   October 28th, 2009 4:01 pm ET

Of course Hulu needs to charge. What makes people think you can fund such a complex infrastructure and content and only have 30 seconds of commercials per 30 minutes. Nothing is free people. The question is what is the right price point. I suspect many people migh be willing to pay $4.99/month to access the content or a pay per view model. The price point would have to be around $.01/minute. Keep in mind this revenue has to be shared by Hulu, the content creator and often the actors. They could also do a hybrid model of say $4.99/month for 12 hours and .01 cents/minute after that.

It's going to be tricky but this could work. It has to work of "FREE" content will eventually be very hard to come by.


Thomas   October 28th, 2009 4:03 pm ET

Hulu? That web site where I can watch reruns? Pay to watch reruns or something I can buy on DVD/Blue Ray? What a quaint idea to take our money....


Alan   October 28th, 2009 4:27 pm ET

Just another person here who won't pay a sub to watch HULU. I think their commercials are good enough. Some of them have even been entertaining and caught my eye. But part of it is the "less is more" effect. Meaning that one or two sponsors per show is more impactful than a glut of ads you just can't remember. Also, I'm less apt to turn my attention away from the computer if its just one quick commercial, rather than a bunch. If its like advertising on tv, then I'm going to the bathroom, kitchen, talking to friends and family... when are companies going to get a clue about these things.


Jason   October 28th, 2009 4:33 pm ET

There is already a pay service that lets you watch movies and TV shows online, it's called netflix, guess what, they have no commercials and more movie selections. I like Hulu, but they have all the shows I want to watch, if they up there selection then they might hang but I see them failing within a few months.


SCSIGirl   October 28th, 2009 4:58 pm ET

I love HULU, I don't have cable, and I don't pay for Internet, my landlord pays for wireless and I use their connection with my wireless network card. I will pay for 32 second or less commericials while watching my favorite programs. The commercials on regular TV and cable are about five minutes in length – what a rip off THAT is!!


MC   October 28th, 2009 4:59 pm ET

I use HULU everyday, but will not pay. I'll find another way and it won't be cable or dish either.


Steve   October 28th, 2009 5:02 pm ET

I could understand if the content on Hulu was actually created for Hulu and only shown there. However, they are making money off the original showing on TV. The money from advertising on the shows on Hulu is just icing on the cake. Ridiculous!


Paul Bucknor   October 28th, 2009 5:05 pm ET

Well it was great while it was FREE, but there is now way i'm paying for this. The search continues...


Nicole   October 28th, 2009 5:07 pm ET

Well, goodbye Hulu. You were a great companion when I had to choose between two shows and couldnt watch both. Oh how many times did I decide to forgo watching Numb3rs to watch Ghost Hunters only to go back the next day and watch Numb3rs on Hulu? And its a great way to look for the Firefly Easter Eggs on Castle.

It was a good deal while it lasted. Wonder if the number of "illegal" downloads will shoot up again now that this happened?


Brent_W   October 28th, 2009 5:14 pm ET

I use Hulu occasionally to watch shows that I missed and I failed to record on my DVR from Directv. It's been great for that. However, for me this would not be worth a subscription as many shows are available for free on the network websites. For shows I can't find elsewhere, I'm betting it would be cheaper to download it off Amazon or a similar service for a couple of dollars on those rare occasions I needed it. As for the bittorrent option, I guess I'm an anomaly in that I feel it's unethical to download content illegally.


RB   October 28th, 2009 5:39 pm ET

This only makes sense if the subscription service is commercial free. If we have to pay AND put up with commercials (which is what we already do with cable) then they can go stick it in their proverbial ear. I hope they're reading this blog. If so, they'll realize that "FREE" IS THE ONLY VALUE THEIR PRODUCT HAS TO OFFER. Otherwise, they're just another sub-par media service.


Jeremy   October 28th, 2009 5:41 pm ET

Paying for Hulu? Pfffft...


James   October 28th, 2009 5:49 pm ET

I say either leave it free with commercials, or pay a fee to watch WITHOUT commercials. If you leave the commercials in AND charge, you're only shooting yourselves in the foot, and your subscriber base will plummet like you would not believe.

So much for the great streaming video service if it goes this route.


Joel   October 28th, 2009 6:04 pm ET

As others have mentioned, many of the shows available on hulu can also be viewed "free" over the web on sites hosted by the show's creators.

No commercials could be a worthwhile value-add, but I personally refuse to pay for access to content and then pay again by watching commercials.


JR   October 28th, 2009 6:13 pm ET

R.I.P. Hulu! Was nice knowing ya!


ms   October 28th, 2009 6:15 pm ET

I would pay some for Hulu. There are some shows I like to watch and often am busy when it airs, so I watch it on Hulu. If the fee was low enough, I'd sign up, especially if i could watch the few shows on cable I like without buying cable.


Mark   October 28th, 2009 6:22 pm ET

I guess I will just get what I want from illegal sites when Hulu starts to charge. I only use it when I forget to Tivo something. TV sucks anyway, I hate to pay for satellite. I am not going pay again to get more lousy stuff off Hulu.
It is a shame. My guess it will go down the same path as Napster.


Arturo   October 28th, 2009 6:23 pm ET

As Carl Lee Hailey said in A Time to Kill, "Yes, they deserved to die and I hope they burn in hell!"


Chris   October 28th, 2009 6:52 pm ET

I think it depends on the price, the idea that you will always get all this content for free because you currently can get it for free is short sighted. TV shows require money to produce and if you can get them all for free without advertisements who is going to pay for the next show, or even the next episode? Why do you think there have been more and more reality shows recently?

It all comes down to whether the price they charge for the service they provide are worth it, but I would rather spend money on things I enjoy to help insure that there will be good programming in the future.

Also I doubt this is just a "we need more money change," this is probably a "we are currently losing money because the networks have to charge more because freeloaders get all their content for free change"


BTS   October 28th, 2009 7:02 pm ET

I loved Hulu while living in the US, but moved out of the country for employment. I would pay if they removed their US-only restriction so I could use Hulu again.


aNDREW   October 28th, 2009 7:08 pm ET

wHY NOT JUST SHOW MORE COMMERCIALS?
RUPPERT IS BECOMING A "D-BAG."


Dan   October 28th, 2009 7:14 pm ET

Bad idea. I have only used hulu if for some absurd reason my dvr didn't record my show. They want me to pay for only using it once in a while. I don't think so.


herbausa   October 28th, 2009 7:19 pm ET

you better rethink it. cannot charge for something you already give for free.
what is hulu now? just a trap?


Lisa   October 28th, 2009 7:21 pm ET

I just use Hulu to keep up on shows I've missed. I only watch on Hulu because it is easier that going to each show page. There is no way I will pay for this service. I'll be watching at the show's main page once Hulu starts to charge. So long hulu.


alex baldwin   October 28th, 2009 7:41 pm ET

Well, well. I see the HULU boards brains have gone to goo too early. We evil aliens will have to move on to another media to jellify the human brain, because NOBODY in their right mind will pay for HULU. Stupid humans.... now we have to find another media to conquer the earth. Hummmmmmm.......


doug c   October 28th, 2009 8:10 pm ET

I guess I would pay a little for a subscription to Hulu, but they would have to step up there selection of full seasons substantially. I don't pay for cable because it is such a scam, so it would make sense for me if I could watch a better rounded selection of the stuff I want to see.


guest   October 28th, 2009 8:59 pm ET

I only watch shows on Hulu. Most people like me (college students) have a couple of favorite shows they watch online for free and tolerate the ads that come with it. However, its only a couple of shows that we are talking about. So if Hulu starts charging, we will just start downloading the good stuff....it doesnt take that long cause I generation isnt addicted to hours of mindless television. Stupid move....why dont u get better movie and anime content and then keep charging sponsers for the ads?


charlie   October 28th, 2009 9:31 pm ET

BAD MOVE ... commercials on hulu are the only ones I do watch...


EZ   October 28th, 2009 9:31 pm ET

The only way to get quality films is to pay for it. Giving away copyrighted material is not a viable business model. Users should pay to watch films.


John   October 28th, 2009 10:32 pm ET

Charge a penny for Hulu and you will lose all the viewers, its that simple.


John   October 28th, 2009 10:35 pm ET

Read the comments Hulu board, and get a clue!


Charles   October 28th, 2009 10:37 pm ET

Well, eventually the entire internet will be pay subscription. When that day comes, they can keep it. Nothing I really need, for me it is just a time killer.


Don   October 29th, 2009 12:04 am ET

I started broadcasting around the time cable TV was born. At first, mountain communities that could get no reception at all would erect an antenna on a nearby mountain. Then CABLES would be run into the town. They might get 5 or 6 staions for a small ($3-$4) fee.

As cable began to evolve, it was touted that because of the fee, cable would eventually become commercial-free, the money being made up for with subscription dollars. Boy! That idea was shut up and FAST!

Now, the FCC allows a station to "tax" you with a commercial every 7 minutes. Armed with this knowledge, I "commercial fight" with either another channel or my video machine.

Just wait though. These people at Hulu are simple "skipping a step" to where this will inevitably lead to...You'll pay for it, watch their commericals and LIKE IT mister!

I'm waiting for a device that can sense commericals and automatically redirect your TV elsewhere for the duration of the commercial, then switch you back.


SLRTX   October 29th, 2009 12:14 am ET

So long. Farewell. auf Wiedersehen. Goodbye.


michael   October 29th, 2009 12:43 am ET

Paying to watch commercials... reminds me of...
Remember when Cable TV started? The big selling point was that it was commercial free!!! Remember? The fees were supposed to cover the costs, and we wouldn't be... paying to watch commercials. But eventually the viewers forgot the original promise, people forgot that free television, and now it's a given that the same terrible advertisers that make the money choices on the networks make them on cable – which is why so many of the shows share the same feature – they suck. And they are surrounded by commercials. Same thing will happen with Hulu. People will forget.


jeremiah   October 29th, 2009 1:42 am ET

I hate HULU ... I am an American who lives in Europe and all I ever get is "Not available in Your Country". So, I either download or watch it somewhere else.


Smitty   October 29th, 2009 2:32 am ET

LOL, I like Hulu, but I will certainly not pay to use their service. There are simply too many alternatives on the web these days. It will be funny to see them FAIL though!


Doc Savage   October 29th, 2009 3:14 am ET

Scru you, Hu Lu. Into the dustbin of history you go, losers.


Vicky   October 29th, 2009 4:20 am ET

Pay to watch Hulu? No Thanks. The free content is what lured me to the website. I would miss it, but can certainly live without it. Farewell Hulu. It's been swell.


Don   October 29th, 2009 6:26 am ET

Goodbye sister Hulu
With your ads poorly placed
Goodbye sister Hulu
I'll just go to some other place


tm   October 29th, 2009 6:59 am ET

They should have renamed this article Hulu prepares for bankruptcy


Devryn   October 29th, 2009 7:40 am ET

Pay for Hulu? My kneejerk reaction is to say hell no, but we haven't seen the plan yet.
If:
-they offer some sort of broadband delivered service like standard cable or satellite
-they still have live television available
-they have all of the channels available that cable and satellite have (except all on demand)
-they up their content to AT LEAST 720p
-they charge a reasonable amount (say...$25/mo)

I would definitely switch from Cable to Hulu. Somehow, I don't think they've thought about it that way...If they had there would be SOME rumor about them developing a set-top cable box. I haven't heard anything, have you?


Ed   October 29th, 2009 8:03 am ET

Okay, why does everyone assume that they will still have commercials once they start charging? That's got to be the carrot – watch for free with commercials (and other limitations) or pay and get rid of them; and how much is your time worth? And why does everyone think an alternative will spring up? Alternatives need studio support. So far the studios have tolerated torrent sites, but you can bet they'll go after them hard if they strike a lucrative deal with Hulu. It's going to be Tivo, cable co. DVR, Sage/Beyond/MCE, Hulu, or the Pirate Bay. Finally...y'all are acting like tourists, man. Do you all work for free?


No fees allowed   October 29th, 2009 8:33 am ET

I use Hulu frequently but I would not use it if they charged a fee.


Laura   October 29th, 2009 8:52 am ET

I watch Hulu everyday. But not if I have to pay. Joining the crew who says goodbye Hulu.


Joey   October 29th, 2009 8:56 am ET

My girlfriend and I watch Hulu every day. But we will NOT pay for that service. Just not gonna happen. Sad to see it go.


psking   October 29th, 2009 8:57 am ET

LOVE LOVE (LOVED) HULU- I felt it was mutually beneficial to both HULU and myself- I view commercials in exchange for access to entertainment content. This "subscription fee" will not fly for me guys- I liked our deal as it stood- no money coming out of my pocket. Don't get greedy- many have done so and failed miserably. Maybe you'll get some bites- but I, personally, will not pay a fee. That's what Netflix is for.


Dez R   October 29th, 2009 8:59 am ET

Just look at what happened when CNN.com tried a subscription based service. Crash –> Burn


Todd   October 29th, 2009 9:05 am ET

Oh well. It was fun while it lasted. Back to watching shows on individual channel's websites. :/


Colorado Dave   October 29th, 2009 9:34 am ET

Depending on the charge I will consider subscribing provided there are no commercials. I have not owned a television in years and with the exception of Hulu have not been subject to television commercials. In fact the insipid commercials on television are part of the reason I didn't replace my TV when it died.

No commercials and a fair price I'll pay.

Pay for commercials NO WAY!


777   October 29th, 2009 9:37 am ET

throw your TV out your window...get a life, locate your BRAIN and read a book or go to the gym. Find something in your life worth doing for once.


Steve   October 29th, 2009 9:37 am ET

"I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value."

I'm sorry, we need to be charged to appreciate the value?? That's what cable and DVR are for.

Bye bye Hulu.


Jamie   October 29th, 2009 9:39 am ET

forget it, i'm not paying for it! Thanks Hulu, you were good but now you're getting greedy...adios!


Ami   October 29th, 2009 9:43 am ET

When did you people start to believe that you're just always going to be ENTITLED TO EVERYTHING?! The people that created the shows WORKED VERY HARD to bring you entertainment, and the people at Hulu WORKED VERY HARD to create a website so you sloths can put your kids in front of it as a babysitter.

Hulu should go to a subscription based service, just as iTunes, Rhapsody, Amazon, etc. all have subscription music services. Just because you're you, does NOT mean you deserve everything handed to you. If you want TV, pay for cable. If you want TV on the internet, pay for it. If you can't afford it, you shouldn't be watching TV anyway, you should be out looking for work, PLAIN. AND. SIMPLE.


Patrick   October 29th, 2009 9:44 am ET

The absolute only way i will pay a subscription fee to Hulu, will be if there are no longer any commercial interupptions. This is also contigent on the fact that the fee is an absurd sum of Money. I am very disappointed that Hulu has decided to move in this direction. It is easy to use and has all of my favorite shows, and i use it everyday. But once they start charging i will just go back to watching the shows on thier respective channels sites......for free.


Pete   October 29th, 2009 9:50 am ET

Lance said on October 28th, 2009 3:05 pm ET

"Here's one.

I am simply amazed at (or is it... horrified by?) the masses who believe they are entitled to everything they want for nothing in return."

Ever hear of bait and switch? Hulu's seemingly done that by offering their services for free and elbowing out the competition by offering HD programming, and now they want to charge now that they feel they got everyone where they want them. Hulu's business model should be that they are filling a hugely growing niche of people who can't afford cable anymore because they've lost their jobs, or people who can't get the programs they want because they're not offered on US television.

Why do we always need to be fleeced?


thigpen   October 29th, 2009 9:55 am ET

Yep, adios Hulu!


g   October 29th, 2009 9:56 am ET

Doesn't Hulu realize that another site will take their place if they go to a sub fee business model?


HULU Fan   October 29th, 2009 10:01 am ET

I am a Hulu user but will not pay a subscription for it. They get revinue from the commercials we are forced to sit through and now you want us to pay as well? Sorry, don't think so. Aloha


Lee   October 29th, 2009 10:08 am ET

I've NEVER minded the commercials on hulu. They could even increase the commercials and I wouldn't mind. I watch something on the site on an almost daily basis. But if hulu begins charging subscription fees, I'm gone. Along with just about everyone I know.


Bruick   October 29th, 2009 10:09 am ET

Nice knowing you, Hulu. Buh Bye!


Jes   October 29th, 2009 10:41 am ET

I don't own a TV, and I have no desire to pay for cable. I watch Hulu a few times a month. It would not be worthwhile for me to pay for Hulu.


djm123   October 29th, 2009 10:50 am ET

Frankly, they should be working on building their content which is very lacking.... I don't see many of the shows I want to see. Nor do I see many of them when I can find them. 3 or 4 episodes of a show is not good content. Who gives a damn about trailers or teasers....


Chad Boudreau   October 29th, 2009 10:50 am ET

I can't say I'm surprised at this.

I was on the verge of canceling cable in favor of using hulu through my PS3 when the company cut service to that platform.

And yaknow? It's not like we're getting something for free. In return for being able to watch hulu for free, we are giving hulu so many eyeballs glued to the screen that they are able to charge, for some shows, more to air a commercial than that commercial costs on cable.

That's right, commercials on hulu cost, at times, more than those same spots on your TV.

I hope they fail.


Travis   October 29th, 2009 10:52 am ET

If they want to start charging for content, they should offer a choice.

A) Free, and endure commercials.

B) Subscription fee, zero commercials.

I guarantee some people would take advantage of package B, and some people would stick with package A. Choice is king in this situation in my opinion.


Brian   October 29th, 2009 10:55 am ET

Since it is not official, shouldn't the title be "Hulu may start charging subscription fee"?


Stop the Cap! » Goodbye to Free?: The ‘Great Wall of Pay’ Under Construction   October 29th, 2009 10:56 am ET

[...] picked up the story in one of their news blogs, and promptly generated more than 700 responses, most hostile to paying [...]


Anthony   October 29th, 2009 11:06 am ET

amoor124 – itis

if hulu starts charging, most people will simply switch to sites that offer the same service but still for free (i.e. fancast). Personally i think its a horrble choice on hulu's part.


travel_chick   October 29th, 2009 11:16 am ET

I've been a loyal hulu fan since the beginning. I suppose it makes sense paying for "cable" programs (if you have cable, you'er paying for it anyway, right?), but I refuse to pay for content that is available for free on "regular" TV (ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS).

As someone who does not own a TV, I would be sad to lose hulu but there are other sites where I can watch my few favorites for free (that includes The Colbert Report & The Daily Show).


RS   October 29th, 2009 11:20 am ET

I was enjoying Hulu, because it was easy to load, and it was a great way to catch an episode of a show I'd missed. But since they're going to charge starting next year, I'm going to stick with youtube or anywhere else I can catch a free video. I was even getting my mother into Hulu, since she's learning how to navigate the internet. For those of us hit by the hard economic times, you shouldn't be charging us. I thought you were for the real people, but you're only for the money people. You've just lost yourself two more customers. Hope you're happy with your $.


travel_chick   October 29th, 2009 11:20 am ET

As a post-script, if I were to have to pay to watch programs on hulu, I would expect NO COMMERCIALS. Otherwise I could pay for the same programming on iTunes–with no commercials.


CC   October 29th, 2009 11:23 am ET

Hulu charges I go elsewhere.


Jay   October 29th, 2009 11:38 am ET

I already pay for Hulu. It's called an internet service provider subscription. Heck, I guess we have to keep silver spoons in the CEO's kids' mouths somehow, huh? Can someone please copy this thread and send it as an email to the customer service line at Hulu?


David   October 29th, 2009 11:45 am ET

Oh no! We might have to pay for things we want! On the Internet! THE HORROR!

I'll be signing up for a subscription, provided it's reasonably priced. Hulu's a good service, and honestly I'd rather have it than cable.


Logan   October 29th, 2009 11:47 am ET

I spend upwards of several hours a day watching hulu. I absolutely love it and don't watch regular t.v. much at all anymore. But if they start charging fees i'll simple go back to the living room to the television. Hulu your great but I'm not paying for you. Huge mistake.


Chris   October 29th, 2009 11:48 am ET

Meh... I don't have cable, but do have broadband internet.

$10/mo to watch what i want is much better than $60/mo for crap cable, including 60 channels I never even touch.

It's the way of the future....


relo   October 29th, 2009 11:54 am ET

I watch everything on HULU because i am in school at night and I miss several of the shows I like, but if they start charging i will move to fancast or one of the other online services that don't charge.


Bruce   October 29th, 2009 12:04 pm ET

To quote – “I think a free model is a very difficult way to capture the value of our content. I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value. Hulu concurs with that, it needs to evolve to have a meaningful subscription model as part of its business.”

What a load of crap. It's the usual CEO sunshine enema diatribe.


reader   October 29th, 2009 12:08 pm ET

If they do switch to a pay for system only, I, too, probably won't use it.

Not that I'm against them making money, but lately every free internet service out there wants to charge a nominal membership fee. When all of your previously free services that you've grown attached to all start wanting you to pay a fee, either monthly or yearly, you have to decide which ones, if any, are worth paying for.

For all I use Hulu, which is quite often, I can get all of their content online through other sources. Most of the shows that have new episodes are offered for free on the network sites for the same amount of time Hulu offers them. To make it worth me spending any money on, they'd have to offer me something I couldn't get for free. More full series of shows, more current movies, etc.

Even then, I'd prefer to have a choice between a free option with commercials and a pay-for option without commercials. Or they might actually do better charging a one-time membership fee, or a small yearly fee rather than a monthly fee. I'm much more likely to cough up $20 for a year's viewing, than $10 a month.


mark   October 29th, 2009 12:08 pm ET

i was so excited to find hulu, i have been watching its programing with i sigh of relief. I dont mind i single simple comercial. Over the commercials on cable. But if they ( hulu ) charge i will find movies elsewhere.


Tim   October 29th, 2009 12:16 pm ET

Yep, I won't be paying either....this is a dumb idea.


Sarah   October 29th, 2009 12:22 pm ET

I don't mind paying but I am not paying and watching commercials.


David   October 29th, 2009 1:24 pm ET

Free idea was invented to be free all the time,
Adding a fee wont be good idea since the same material can be taken from other sources. Increase the commercials and other ways to make for what is missing. It might help. !!!


Daniel Roberts   October 29th, 2009 1:48 pm ET

from my understanding on this folks

Hulu will remain free with the services that are currently offered. I hear they are going to make a premium service available that does not have commercials. But... Once again.... my understanding is that the services already offered for free will remain free. Lets not loose control over ourselves just yet...


J   October 29th, 2009 2:00 pm ET

I'm with the dozens of you that won't pay. There are plenty of places that stream for free. I use Hulu now because of the higher quality. It's good enough quality that I'll deal with commercials, but it's not so good that I'd be willing to pay.

Good luck, Hulu.


Erin L.   October 29th, 2009 3:01 pm ET

This is a horrible decision on their part... dumb dumb dumb dumb DUMB. Bye bye Hulu.


Hulu Fan   October 29th, 2009 3:24 pm ET

I don't think that this will happen, if it does they will loose MANY if not Most of the users they have. This show you how money hungry those executives are.


Jessica Chapman   October 29th, 2009 6:22 pm ET

Yup – Start charging and I'm done with Hulu. Which is a total drag. Because I refer people to Hulu and even pay attention to the commercials. If I'm going to pay for it, I'll download it from iTunes.


Daniel   October 29th, 2009 6:51 pm ET

I pay for cable TV that I never get to watch because my kids are always watching it. I dont think I can bring myself to pay for Hulu on top of that.

Besides, I think I watch two shows on Hulu, which are available elsewhere. I just use it because its there and its free.

The shows I watch aren't that important to me, and the kids are happy.


Boots   October 29th, 2009 9:15 pm ET

Yep, bye bye hulu


Koiboy   October 30th, 2009 12:55 am ET

Don't think so....... I will be moving on to another website. Asta luego HULU!!


Mike   October 30th, 2009 9:33 am ET

Newscorpse just guaranteed Netflix another satisfied customer and Bittorrent another dedicated pirate. I'm done with Hulu now.


Bill   October 30th, 2009 10:29 am ET

This must have been in Hulu's business plan all along. Provide a service for free, just long enough to try to get people hooked, and then start charging them. (It's the way drug dealers work too.) Fortunately, Hulu is not addictive and it is not the only game-in-town. I believe this plan will, and should backfire on them. Their viewership will decrease so dramatically that advertisers will stay away too.


EZE   October 30th, 2009 11:56 am ET

I have enjoyed Hulu while it lasted. Leave it to NBC to screw up a good thing.


Ruphias   October 30th, 2009 12:37 pm ET

well if Hulu does this then they have signed their death certificate. Veoh has much more content and modeled the same way as Hulu but they arent charging and dont plan to; all you have to do with Veoh is type in the name of the show then you can find most if not all of the episodes.


JTM   October 30th, 2009 3:20 pm ET

Deleted the bookmark already. They are out of there mind
Charging for reruns. Greed it really is a shame.


Richard   October 30th, 2009 4:01 pm ET

I haven't read one comment here in favor of paying for HULU.

I mean, really, what's not to like about paying for something you can get somewhere else for free? Or paying twice for program content you can get off cable or satellite? Or wasting time watching the same commercials you've already seen a hundred times before? (Well actually some of the commercials are better than the programs or movies.)

What's good about charging for HULU? Let me think about it and I'll get back to you.....


Carl   October 30th, 2009 4:01 pm ET

I use Hulu all the time...I still download show that are not on hulu. when hulu starts charging I will got back to bittorent ..


Consumer X   October 30th, 2009 4:37 pm ET

I find it funny that individuals that utilize HULU dont realize the business/operational implications that come in to play in running a service such as this. I cant believe that an operation such as HULU does not have *outstanding* operational costs ($$$) to keep it running. The people costs and equipment alone to make it all keep running probably cost more than they are receiving for the minimal commercial revenue they receive currently. I imagine if they dont start finding another revenue stream they would fold eventually anyway. "All good things..." or should that statement be reworded to "All free things...."


Norman   October 30th, 2009 4:58 pm ET

It amazes me how some companies will do EXACTLY what will drive away their most loyal customers in an attempt to make money


Daniel   October 30th, 2009 5:05 pm ET

IF YOU GO TO A SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE, YOU CAN KISS A MAJORITY OF YOUR USER BASE GOODBYE!


tony   October 30th, 2009 5:56 pm ET

I have an idea!

STOP WATCHING TV, HULU, or all that other crap.

From the hours upon hours of watching shows, what good has come of it?

NOTHING


bcr   October 30th, 2009 6:21 pm ET

You can catch the past episodes of Bewitched and others on You Tube. Perhaps News Corp. print media is financially suffering so much that they feel the need to take this sort of direction. When Hulu's viewing trickles down to a paltry drop or two, perhaps a rethinking will be in order. Pulling the plug on the advertising packed subscription service, and any further employment of Chase Carey. I also cast a NO-PAY vote! Greed, arrogance, and stupidity, seemingly knows no bounds in the electronic media.


Andy   October 31st, 2009 9:31 am ET

The executives at Hulu need to read Barbara Tuchman's "The March of Folly." It's a historic examination of why governments do stupid things that are clearly against their better interest because of hubris, group think, management isolation, and so on. She could have written a whole chapter on the last eight years. I can only hope they see the universal disdain for this foolish idea in this discussion area and change their minds. Watching commercials and having to pay is a bad idea. Cable is a bad analogy because we already pay high fees to access the internet. Are they saying we should now pay an additional content fee to CNN, ABC, or the Discovery Channel? Sorry boys, you won't get that third vacation home from me. I'll look elsewhere.


bob   October 31st, 2009 9:59 am ET

So Hulu won't be around anymore once this takes effect. People will just torrent or use sidereel etc, to get their fix. Yes, people won't pay for content anymore David. Not on the internet, when 30 seconds later you can watch the same show for free somewhere else illegally.


rtol   October 31st, 2009 10:12 am ET

we already pay for netflix and cable. If hulu starts charging, I'll just use netflix more. I echo what others have said. If hulu starts this then "bye, bye, hulu."


malmax   October 31st, 2009 11:45 am ET

I enjoy the convenience of HULU, but will definately find another source if they go fee based. Listen to your customers...we will not pay for this service.


Tboy72   October 31st, 2009 12:22 pm ET

This will be the fall of Hulu. There is simply no way enough people are going to be willing to pay for a service that was previously free. Especially if nothing profoundly different happens to the site. Such as commercial free video.

I sincerely hope the execs. at Hulu put some more thought into this move.

Seriously!


Tim Lister   October 31st, 2009 12:45 pm ET

I have DSL and no cable, haven't had cable for over 15 years, let me tell you people, life is better without cable! Try it for 30 days, it's a free experiment and enjoy getting hours of your life back that you used to sacrifice for shitty sitcoms and dramas...I get some news and documentaries from PBS and now with Netflix I can get all the shows I want to watch COMMERCIAL FREE! That, and saving hours that I would've spent watching commercials and $100/month in cable fees!


charles   October 31st, 2009 12:49 pm ET

If hulu starts to charge then I too will look elsewhere.


Stepho   October 31st, 2009 3:02 pm ET

I live alone on small wages with cut hours, I can't afford cable TV right now and since they switched to digital I can't even have FOX or any of those free channels because the damn antennae doesn't pick them up. I haven't seen a single game of football all year, have to use the internet to see the news/weather and such. Hulu is about all I have entertainment wise, but I sure as hell am not paying for it when I already pay for internet to watch it in the 1st place. Bye bye Hulu.


Michael   October 31st, 2009 5:28 pm ET

If hulu wants to charge a subscription, that's fine. I just won't be using it anymore (not like I used it much anyway). If they do implement one, they should follow roosterteeth.com's model: $10 every 6 months for bonus and extra content, while the basic features are free. No commercials if subscribing though, why pay to watch the same stuff you can see for free on TV?


socialistBS   October 31st, 2009 8:46 pm ET

UNBELIEVABLE a BUSINESS wants to charge people money for providing a service?

What is it with all the gimmie gimmie gimmies who think they are entitled to get everything for free or at cost?

YOU PEOPLE ARE NOT ENTITLED TO ANYTHING. STOP LEECHING OFF EVERYONE ON THE PLANET!


Dubias   October 31st, 2009 10:45 pm ET

Paid HULU subscription = No commercials
Commercial supported = No $$$ subscription

It's so simple...!!!!


JD Decatur, IL   November 1st, 2009 9:27 am ET

Why try to fix something that isn't broken? I've read where HULU has all of their ad blocks sold out for periods to come, it all comes down to greed, if the fee is reasonable and they would definitely have to remove the ads altogether then maybe I could pay for the service. Oherwise I'm gone, and I've been using HULU since the beta stage. Oh so sad.


Darrell   November 1st, 2009 11:22 am ET

My Family watches Netflix 5 to 1 over Hulu now.
Either by DVD/Blueray or Streaming. We do not have Cable or a Sat Dish. We have Computers and Monitors even in the Livingroom. We do have over the air HDTV adaptors in every computer. We would only pay to watch Hulu if they had more content and less advertising. My advice to Hulu is to put up more content and keep the advertising that you have now. And try to stream more live content like the Austin ACL Festival.
Times are tough, The last item we will cut back on is the broadband connection. We currently are down to just Cell Phones and Broadband.
9 times out of ten the online video stream is a reduced window down in the corner of the monitor while the user surfs or plays a video game.


Imani   November 1st, 2009 11:26 am ET

I also won't pay a subscription for Hulu. Watch it maybe 5 or 6 times a year. Don't have any other access to TV. Have better uses for my time. I tolerate the ads and don't think I need to pay a fee on top of that.


John Wehrle   November 1st, 2009 11:48 am ET

Keep it free or we will flee.


Justin   November 1st, 2009 2:27 pm ET

I think Hulu should offer a paid option, alternative to watching commercials. There's a great deal of overlap with Netflix streaming content, and it seems as if it should be much easier and more effective to target advertising. I find that one commercial per break is more tolerable than the chore of fast forwarding on TiVo, and I'm actually exposed to the advertising. I've noticed that some prime time shows, e.g. LOST, have started keeping the commercial breaks shorter, presumably charging more, and that I also often watch these.

Maybe for $5-10 a month, I should be able to nuke the ads, but I would suggest if content creators want to explore this model, to work better with iTunes and Netflix so that content is available on Hulu, iTunes, and Netflix all at once. Numbers comparing ads, pay-per-episode, and subscription model aren't relevant to compare when content is only available using one model.

It is, of course, always true that users seeking easy access to digital media will break outside all revenue models and jump on filesharing networks. At any price, if I can get a torrent off someone's tivo faster than I can get to Hulu, iTunes, or Netflix, the opportunity to monetize that episode to me is gone for at least a while.


CF   November 1st, 2009 3:06 pm ET

Thankfully I can stream movies and TV shows from Netflix to my computer or Xbox. Hulu is nice but not something I will pay for. If they offered DVD rentals maybe, but that's what Netflix is for.


Sense   November 1st, 2009 3:36 pm ET

Hey Hulu,
Charge a sub. fee and have commercials, you sound just like cable without all the content.


nireyaj   November 1st, 2009 3:53 pm ET

I have neither cable, satellite, or hulu. I buy pre-recorded videos of favorite TV shows/movies, and: watch them on my schedule, watch without commercials, pay only once, watch as often as I please, trade with friends who do likewise, and have no complaints...or ongoing costs. It's wonderful to have both a brain, and balls. Candybottoms who let subscription services bully them deserve what they get.


atlanta   November 1st, 2009 9:05 pm ET

If hulu didnt spend millions of dollars on superbowl commercials and advertising it wouldnt feel like it needs to charge I might be willing to pay no more then 2$ a month for hulu but there are soo many free alternatives


Matthew   November 2nd, 2009 1:47 am ET

Well with Internet speeds not comparable to cable speeds to watch TV and movies in real time, I will not make the switch.


Hulahoop   November 2nd, 2009 8:56 am ET

Bye bye Hulu


Pemulis   November 2nd, 2009 10:00 am ET

ohh guess ill have to find somewhere else.

hulu was nice while it lasted.


Alex   November 2nd, 2009 10:53 am ET

Hulu is going to take a MAJOR hit in business if they start to charge. Horrible idea, i certainly wont be paying.


Steve   November 2nd, 2009 11:24 am ET

I can say I will use the other international sites for viewing my weekly shows. Hulu has great quality but I already pay $160 a week for Comcast. There is no way I will pay more just to watch it online instead of at home. Other foreign places can be used such as MegaVideo, or watch-movies-links.net, or thewatchmoviesdotcom place. Until the end of time people will continue to search out free routes to watch their films and television shows. Just wait until we have someone willing to send a private satellite into space and then we can have Pirated TV whenever we want.


Courtney   November 2nd, 2009 1:36 pm ET

If they charge I will go to Justin.tv and watch live stream for free.


MAT   November 2nd, 2009 1:46 pm ET

i agree; if they turn hulu into a paid content site i will discontinue my use of it.


john   November 2nd, 2009 2:20 pm ET

"I think what we need to do is deliver that content to consumers in a way where they will appreciate the value."

The reason Hulu is so popular is because the consumer already appreciates it. Really, Chase, you don't have to tell me what you think I want. That type of consumer went bye-bye a long time ago...And so will your current audience if you start charging.


Charles Linberg   November 3rd, 2009 8:47 am ET

I enjoy the endless benefits of Hulu and watch shows on it every day (no joke). And i sadly will not pay to have this and will look for alternitives; i have talked to countless friends who also use this site and agree with me. Hulu will lose their fan base and many, many viewers. Sorry Hulu.


Jason   November 3rd, 2009 9:22 am ET

Hulu charging will be it's ultimate downfall. There are multiple sites out there that provide television shows for free and multiple ways to obtain said shows. I personally don't watch TV enough right now to justify paying a subscription. Hulu is going to scare off a lot of their customers if the go to a subscription only service. The best chance they have if they HAVE to go to some kind of subscription based system is to make a "free" option with a "premium" service. That way they still keep their viewership for the most part, but also can wrangle in those that are willing to pay up the extra dough. If you look down internet history changing your model from free to paid service always ALWAYS ends in failure.


Chelsea   November 3rd, 2009 1:02 pm ET

Are you kidding? Hulu's first mistake was removing all but season one of Arrested Development !!!


Leo   November 3rd, 2009 1:24 pm ET

I check out Hulu a few times a week and love it. But I guarantee I will NOT pay for it.


Steve   November 3rd, 2009 2:05 pm ET

I don't want to pay either but . . . How much does it cost for Hulu to show this content. I heard people comment about corporate greed but they may be making very little money if any at all. When there is free music, free movies, etc, who pays for the musicians, who pays the actors, who pays the technicians.

I don't see NEARLY the quality of musicians or recordings that there were in past years. Is it because it's that much harder to make a living as a musician, artist, photographer, actor. TV has quit makin good dramas or character driven shows because it's too expensive o make. Welcome reality TV. It's cheap. I don't want to pay for stuff either but I want good music, good movies, good shows.


Daniel   November 3rd, 2009 2:29 pm ET

I am extremely disappointed with HULU. I have been registered with this website for a very long time and love it. I dont see any added value in a pay service. There isnt anything "more" they can offer to validate such a decision to start charging. I can got to multiple other sources to view shows . As soon as they start charging im GONE! Good luck with that HULU , you,ve made a horrible decision.


Frank   November 3rd, 2009 2:57 pm ET

What I have seen here confirms my suspicions of what I thought might happen to HULU when they announced this – the site will die, plain and simple. Just another example of corporate greed killing a fantastic idea and service.


Brehus   November 3rd, 2009 5:08 pm ET

Why charge when many of the cable stations offer free streams of their shows on their websites? Why pay Hulu when you can just go to the cable stations website and watch the show for free?


Sandy   November 3rd, 2009 5:12 pm ET

I hope hulu is reviewing each of these posts because I think they have tapped into a very sensitive nerve. 95% of the posts have indicated they would not pay for a hulu subscription. Does the advertising model work with 19 out 20 current visitors opting to go elsewhere. I don't think think so! Other online services that tried the subscription model have failed. What makes hulu so compelling that people would sign up for the service? I think the hulu management better do a better job of listening to their visitors. I'm sure there must be a better revenue model they could employ that wouldn't drive 95% of the customer base to other sites.


Elwiss   November 3rd, 2009 6:00 pm ET

Yea, charge for the same contents you can see for free on other sites. Drive away your traffic and customers why don't you. Good idea Hulu. **Sarcasm**


Rey Ortega   November 3rd, 2009 7:02 pm ET

So Hulu will start charging to watch some shows that I can see for free through ABC, CBS, and NBC's websites. I don't know if THEY know that these shows are available through the network websites for free.

I understand that Hulu has more content than just local network shows, but the other content isn't worth the money. Now, if they had pay per view type movies, live broadcasts of sports events and no commercials, I'd buy-in. I just don't see that happening.


John   November 4th, 2009 9:17 am ET

I follow multiple shows and watch a plethora of their commercials everyday. But I guarantee you that when they charge a subscription fee that a huge number of their audience is going to leave and find the next best thing, or continue to download illegally. And where's all of their advertising revenue then. They may be able to hide/fudge their drastic loss in viewer numbers initially. But when advertisers learn the truth, they'll tear up their contracts with hulu and tell them to go screw themselves. It won't be worth anything anymore. The cost of losing viewers and advertising revenue v. the benefit from their subscription fee. I'm almost positive they'll lose in the short-term and long-term. And they're movie selection is crap by the way. If you have to pay for something, get Net Flix.


Blessing   November 4th, 2009 10:46 am ET

They already have a good thing going on for them right now, so why mess it up. I use Hulu alot to keep up with the show i miss. I guarantee that if they start levying a fee, they wont last a year. Me alongside other Hulu users will be looking for other alternatives asap. So Hulu drop the idea of charging a fee. It's ridiculous and i dont foresee anyone paying to use Hulu.


nomadrider   November 4th, 2009 2:37 pm ET

of course with Disney now involved, they want to have commercials and a fee. I don't need it.


Jacob   November 4th, 2009 4:16 pm ET

Guess they don't want to take over the world after all...


Jesse   November 4th, 2009 5:36 pm ET

Ill pay a fee if there were no commercials.... Thats why I went to Sat Radio. Why would I pay a fee and watch commercials? Do they want people to Pirate their material? Thats all this will accomplish.


notrandom   November 4th, 2009 8:24 pm ET

I will allow commercials to play so hulu can get paid, but that is it.
I will not pay for this. I am already paying for Cable internet and Television.

Hulu doesn't have what it takes to replace my cable tv service nor does the technology exist to allow such a concept, Not yet atleast...

I will find other ways to catch up on my shows before i pay for hulu for this service, which I already feel i am contributing to when i am watching advertisment on hulu, ad blocker disabled.


Mark Claudius Png   November 4th, 2009 11:39 pm ET

Someone's gotta foot the bill eventually. If not the consumers then the investor ... and if you were in his shoes, won't you wanna know if you're gonna get your money back ... some day?

I agree that moving to a complete subscription model will alienate already happy users. I support decisions to create 'premium' products instead ... and if they're any good ... well ... here's my money.


Tony   November 5th, 2009 9:26 am ET

Here's a way that the good folks at News Corp. should look at this situation.

First-to-market – – – Yahoo!
Second-to-market – – – Google

First-to-make-big-business-mistake – – – Yahoo!
First-to-avoid-same-dumb-mistake – – – Google

First place in search engine war – – – Google

If News Corp. charges for Hulu, another company will sprout up and replace Hulu as top dog.


Buc   November 5th, 2009 2:39 pm ET

HAHA is Hulu purposely trying to go out of business? Nobody will pay for a subscription for Hulu and i certainly won't.


Paul   November 5th, 2009 8:02 pm ET

I agree, if Hulu starts charging I'm gone.


Heavy user   November 6th, 2009 6:56 pm ET

Bye bye Hulu. There are many many sites where you can watch shows for free, including sites in China and other countries, all in English. So long hulu, you will be remembered as that blip in the transition of tv watching just like the 8 track tape.


john Sonpull, Camden, NJ   November 6th, 2009 11:27 pm ET

haha....see you in iHell Hulu...

the minute you start charging is when i delete your bookmark and go another site or back to BT.

i'm so happy when companies announce stupid decisions early so i can sell their stock before it drops.


Chad   November 7th, 2009 9:26 am ET

We recently got rid of our cable and replaced it with the largest broadband circuit we could get, 20MB. So far I must say the advantages of ditching the cable portion of our bill to acquire 20MB DSL service has surpassed our expectations. We pay $75.00 a month for unlimited 20MB/s down and 1 MB up. We use Hulu and other sites to watch the few shows we normally watch and we use Netflix for movies. The added bonus comes since we really only watch 5 shows. So we use the bandwidth for work and play such as remote desktop, 2 XBox 360 Live accounts, WoW, PS3, DSi, pretty much everything. And the best thing is, my kids are better off for it. Their grades have improved and some of the sites they have found are absolutely incredible.

We are an exception I will grant you that, but only for the time being. Eventually all we will have is a broadband link and everything else with be piece mill. In the long run I see paying $5.00 per month per channel, something everyone has wanted, but the cable and Satellite companies have prevented, but now with INternet TV growing, well finally we can choose what channels we wish to watch and pay for.

I understand some will say this will be wrong in the long run, but change is a constant thing. Back in 1988 I predicted that eventually homes would pay for a central communication link and would be able to purchase the information and entertainment they wanted and now that vission is coming true. (Well before the term broadband existed.)

Anyway Hulu moving to a subscribtion base is normal. I for one am willing to give it a try. After all untill we see the price and quality of service for their subscription based service, how do we know it's going to be a bad thing. But one thing is for sure, I hope I get the option to control my advertisement. LOL! That's the next thing, tailered advertisement, they already do it with your average web site so why not TV or Internet TV?


Clay   November 7th, 2009 10:45 am ET

They have bumped their heads! I will definitely leave if they start charging.


This is not a republic   November 7th, 2009 3:39 pm ET

They'll get what there un-cautiously asking for. another decline in commercial representation among the intellectual elite. For 10,000+ years the intelligent and the circumstances of humanity have always drove the survival of the economy. this will be hulu doing well in the short term, but can it survive this profit injunction to a soon to be retired Board of representatives. Some one should pass a law called "no pigeons for the price of doves law" If i see a commercial i don't pay. if i don't see a commercial that's different. The greatest sin of all is to steal someones time.


Joseph   November 8th, 2009 7:17 pm ET

I pay for cable TV. I pay for high speed internet. Why on Earth would I pay for something more? Hulu was a nice alternative to buying a digital video recorder (ala Tivo), but I'd rather make a one-time payment for that, instead of monthly fees.
As the good folk at 4chan would say: fail business model is FAIL.


John Kantor   November 8th, 2009 7:38 pm ET

Whether subscription is feasible or not, it's obvious that Carey is another clown without a clue. Consumers have never paid for "content" – whether it was 78rpm records or digital video – and never will. They pay for the convenience of accessing it. That's why iTunes is so successful.


Justin B   November 9th, 2009 9:35 am ET

If Hulu would like to offer a service where subscribers can get commercial-free shows and added availability to older episodes rather than the 5-10 they offer for most shows, I think it would be a great idea. However, going to a subscription only type format would be a death blow. Keeping their current format but adding an additional optional paid subscription format would be their best bet. I wouldn't even mind if they added a couple more commercials to the free versions; it's still fewer commercials I am put through by the television networks.


Sean   November 9th, 2009 1:14 pm ET

I will not be paying for this as well. I use Hulu to catch up on shows I missed and didn't mind the ad content since the quality was so high. If they begin charging I will begin downloading my shows using Bittorrent instead. It's idiotic to think that people will pay to watch this with the ads still present when most of the content is broadcast already.


Sean   November 9th, 2009 10:37 pm ET

Me? Pay? That's funny!


Leonard Cohen H8Me   November 11th, 2009 2:47 am ET

This is what should happen– Keep the version of Hulu as we've grown accustomed; that is, have some commercial interruption during the show (or one long one in the beginning) and have a limited shelf life on current shows.

Then have the upgrade version, paid subscription of course. This upgraded version: No commercials. No Shelf Life on Shows. Have ALLseasons of a show available. And MOST IMPORTANTLY– NO CONTRACT with the paid subscription (keep it on a month to month basis, pay as you go. None of this 6 months 12 months got you by the balls). Oh yeah, subscriptions should be cheap 5 us dollars maybe 10$ tops.

Here's the rub– Those fans who've become addicted a show will be more apt to subscribe when the show will only be posted for free for a limited time. A shelf life of two weeks after the original air date. After that they'll need to see it on the upgrade.

And here's another idea, after the end of a current show's season re-post all the past episodes (the one's only accessible on the upgrade version). Then when the new season airs on TV take those old episodes off the free Hulu site and make them only accessible on the upgrade.

One more thing, Hulu can you make those old shows for free. I'm not suggesting all the time just as a revolving thing like for two months post all the seasons of a by-gone show. Then make them accessible only on the upgrade.


hiddencoast   November 18th, 2009 9:24 pm ET

I'm not going to pay a subscription fee. I'll leave Hulu.


rob   November 21st, 2009 12:12 pm ET

I use hulu to watch TV shows that I can get via chnl websites. Given that, I'll just go directly to the sites. (I've bookmarked them in delicious and tagged them all.) As for other stuff, like the movies, there just aren't enough of those that i'd watch to make it worth paying for a subscription.


Chad   November 27th, 2009 10:12 pm ET

Hulu gets paid to display ad content on their site, so why the greed? Hulu started as a great site that everyone talks about and loves and will end up being a one hit wonder that everyone is disgusted with if they push pricing on the viewers. I canceled cable because of Hulu, but I may end up having to go back to dreaded cable if they start to charge. BTW, this goes out to the HULU BOARD...If you charge, another site will pop up and all of your viewers will flee to the next best thing. Please think about the implications of your decision.


Miami   December 4th, 2009 9:46 pm ET

Late to the party! I just heard this news today. Bah!

I have no objection to the ads on Hulu. They are shorter than the ones on TV (a typical "one-hour" TV show usually runs 45 minutes on Hulu) and, best invention ever, they tell you how many seconds you have to wait for your video to resume.

Through Hulu, I've discovered new shows I love like 30 Rock and Glee. I don't think I'd have seen those if they weren't on Hulu. I've also spent hours watching golden oldies (with updated commercials) like Hill Street Blues.

The Hulu model is interesting and could be developed more, but Hulu needs to know that there are and will always be competitors out there – bittorents, fancast, YouTube, and the network's own channels.

$10/mo? Maybe. Maybe for me. It sounds as though I am quite alone here, though.


Sad   December 10th, 2009 1:37 am ET

Bad idea. Super bad. No one will subscribe. Forget it.


Pung   December 16th, 2009 12:47 pm ET

Hulu, listen up, I have your solution. Everyone has been trying to get Hulu on their tv. By boxee or apple tv or any other way they can. And you've blocked them. Here's why you blocked them: You're going to make a $200 dollar hulu box. With Wi-fi and HDMI and make it slim, so I can tuck it behind my flatscreen tv mount. There's some additional revenue right there. You can charge more to advertisers, because it's not internet pre-roll you're selling, it's actual TV commercials which are worth 10x as much. The box will become the must have device for Christmas 2010. Don't forget Amazon, Netflix, and Slingbox like capability, which you can also skim a little off the top. Also think about: Skype video calls on your tv, an HBO subcription, Storage for music and pictures, an Optical Out for surround sound. You can single-handedly kill cable. Someone will do it eventually – apple just may beat you to it.


JackSchidt   December 21st, 2009 12:07 am ET

never has my online name been more appropriate to describe something as this–ive used hulu forever-i just spend the 15 second breaks loading another page, or lighting up a smoke–but hulu doesn't know jackschidt if they think im gonna pay money in this economy for the equivalent of two cable subscriptions. i like so many others will just go to the network sites or torrent somebodys tivo of the episodes i wanna see.


Jean   December 23rd, 2009 11:20 pm ET

NOOOOOOO
Why hulu y? Now, i'm forced to watch shows on vlc via download :(


CB   December 28th, 2009 5:57 pm ET

I'll be saying goodbye to Hulu.


ridwanzero   December 29th, 2009 2:10 am ET

never has my online name been more appropriate to describe something as this–ive used hulu forever-i just spend the 15 second breaks loading another page, or lighting up a smoke–but hulu doesn't know jackschidt if they think im gonna pay money in this economy for the equivalent of two cable subscriptions. i like so many others will just go to the network sites or torrent somebodys tivo of the episodes i wanna see........

onlineuniversalwork


JackSchidt   December 29th, 2009 8:27 am ET

hey ridwanzero-why did you just copy and paste my comment as yours?


Josh   January 11th, 2010 12:02 am ET

Watch all the time, but that will likely stop when they make the move.


Addi   February 1st, 2010 2:44 am ET

I agree with everyone here. To have to pay + endure the commercials, no matter how short? Peace out. (As much as I appreciate and enjoy Hulu now.)


brad dee   April 5th, 2010 7:06 am ET

A subscription service might be OK, if the HULU producers figure out a way to keep the streaming continuous without buffering every 5 minutes.


The Future of Television < Trey Givens   June 20th, 2010 10:17 pm ET

[...] = 'TreyPeden';Late last year, people started talking about a rumor that Hulu.com would start charging a subscription fee.  This would be very bad for someone like me who doesn't subscribe to a [...]


Jim77777   June 21st, 2010 12:16 pm ET

I only watch cable TV when it is available at the resorts I live in when I am on vacation for a month or so. So, I could say I can compare free TV with basic cable that sells for around $100 a month.

I am amazed that anyone would pay for basic cable considering the long and frequent commercials as compared to free TV. In the last 10 years, the commercials have become longer and longer. It is like the frog in a pot of hot water. You cable users are being cooked and not knowing it.

Cable was to be pay to view and no commercials.

How does hulu support itself now and being free? Sounds very greedy to me.

I was going to put hulu on my TV and up grade from DSL just for hulu. But now I will sit on the whole idea and see how it shakes out. I'm tired of bait and switch and nickle and dime me to death. They need me, I don't need them.


Johnny B   June 24th, 2010 8:30 pm ET

The problem you all do not realize is that if the broadcasters do not get their money (contract revenue) from places like cable companies because their subscriber base is looking elsewhere for programming, what makes you think they will not up the contract with companies like hulu to make up this difference? Where will the money come from that hulu earns if they do not charge their customers? This is what happens when you stop paying companies for services that is necessary and fuel the economy. No wonder U.S. is in the slumps, no one wants to put money back into the ecomony.


Katsura   June 25th, 2010 8:22 am ET

Why should this be free? The major broadcast networks are even toying with the idea of going to a fee based service instead of broadcasting for free. Ad revenue isnt what it once was and companies are not making enough with that as their sole source of income. Hulu is a business but people here act as if it is a not for profit organization. I hear complaints of stale programming not updated frequently enough followed by a complaint that they may begin to charge for the service. You can't even get a dvr from a cable company for $5 a month, and to watch fancast you have to already be paying for that channel along with the internet subscription fee, all in all what hulu is talking about here doesnt seem to be a big deal. I am not surprised that people are complaining though, it's typical of the culture of entitlement we find ourselves in. Considering how much has been stolen from these companies online this isnt a big deal.


Joe   June 25th, 2010 10:48 am ET

Gotta love when people who work at Hulu come on here to argue the merits of charging the consumer base for something that was free. They have increased advertising inventory and can charge a premium to advertisers for targeting, they should add another way to purchase via hulu instead of charging by "channel". Give advertisers the right to choose property or their own "channel mix" at a slightly higher CPM and they will have more than enough revenue.

I just don't see the value of what they are offering given that they are adding additional advertising on the service at a higher CPM then they recieve via TV. Add in the additional feedback users can give ads and just make it a login required to access the content.

But the real reason they are charging is because they don't want ondemand TV to be successful, they make the majority of their money via scheduled live viewing on the regular TV/cable model. They made their own threat to that model which is smarter than letting someone else do it...but someone high up got scared and wanted to either slow down the transition or kill it by adding a subscription fee.

All i gotta say is good luck network TV you had a good transition and you are working to kill it...How dumb can you be?


John   June 25th, 2010 9:54 pm ET

First off, I have heard NOTHING regarding regular, broadcast networks (over the air) wanting to charge us for the right to see over-the-air broadcasts. I somehow sense some B.S.

Secondly, to Joe–you are the most intelligent response i have seen on this thread yet.

Simply put, it all boils down to one word–greed. The multi-BILLION dollar entertainment companies aren't satisfied with BILLIONS now, they want to make MORE. Lest Hollywood executives forget, they are a business. We are the customers. THEY work for US. We will find ways to get our entertainment elsewhere if we are not satisfied with the quality and cost of what we get through them.


Francesca Webb   June 30th, 2010 1:51 pm ET

Public Relations is all about pleasing the common people.:",


Jayden Thomas   September 14th, 2010 4:57 am ET

you should always maintain good public relations specially if you operate a business-`;


Oxygen Monitor :   October 24th, 2010 6:10 pm ET

we should always keep a very good public relations no matter what, -'*


Premature Ejaculation Treatment   December 21st, 2010 7:13 pm ET

there are times that good public relations cannot be always achieved ~~`


J   January 2nd, 2011 7:48 pm ET

Bye Hulu, Not paying to watch commercials. Not paying for a subscription either.


SHARETIPSINFO   May 7th, 2011 5:15 am ET

Hi,
Lot of global tensions is going on at this time. Japan is expected to pull out its money from the global market as they want to revamp their country now. In current scenario anything can happen in the Share market Investors are advised not to panic and stay invested only safe traders and investors should exit their long positions on every high and one can use every decline as an opportunity to enter market again.
Regards
SHARETIPSINFO TEAM


Pharmg29   August 13th, 2011 7:55 am ET

Hello! dfgdffb interesting dfgdffb site! I'm really like it! Very, very dfgdffb good!


Pharmd570   August 13th, 2011 7:55 am ET

Hello! cceccbb interesting cceccbb site! I'm really like it! Very, very cceccbb good!


Pharmk964   August 17th, 2011 6:48 pm ET

Hello! cfakfed interesting cfakfed site! I'm really like it! Very, very cfakfed good!


Pharmb245   August 17th, 2011 6:48 pm ET

Hello! dcdecck interesting dcdecck site! I'm really like it! Very, very dcdecck good!


Pharmd962   September 14th, 2011 1:28 pm ET

Hello! eeaddbe interesting eeaddbe site! I'm really like it! Very, very eeaddbe good!


Pharme366   September 14th, 2011 1:28 pm ET

Hello! kggeedd interesting kggeedd site! I'm really like it! Very, very kggeedd good!


Black Mold   November 2nd, 2011 9:29 pm ET

Appreciation For This Post, was added to my bookmarks.


I have read the entire article in this blog and I was amazed on how you cleary emphasize the use of the target coupon codes. Thanks!   November 28th, 2011 2:48 am ET

I'm a non-smokernever have, never will. OF COURSE you should be allowed to "smoke" your e-cigs anywhere, including on planes. Doesn't steam come off of coffee too? LOL! God, how much healthier we would be as a whole if everyone switched to e-cigs. Regular cigs cause so many health problems. All of this would DISAPPEAR... DISAPPEAR overnight if e-cigs replaced them. My god, WHAT ARE WE WAITING FOR??? Why are we quibbling over nonsense? "Smoke" them puppies anywhere you want, anytime you want.. PLEASE! Cripes, we should have government sponsored advertising for them and tax credits for the initial purchase. Talk about cutting down on the cost of health care! It's so f'ing obvious. These things are a miracle A MIRACLE.


Lurlene Sabot   December 7th, 2011 6:04 pm ET

Jim – aside from your rash ...our ankles look identical. I still can't believe you are standing there...that's so neat to see. I have my appt this Friday...I'm supposed to be NWB now, but I have been sort of walking with the crutches, probably 25% on the booted foot...and it feels great.


Marnie Chavarin   December 11th, 2011 8:55 pm ET

You can definitely see your enthusiasm in the work you write. The world hopes for more passionate writers like you who aren?�t afraid to say how they believe. Always go after your heart.


removal of redirect virus   April 2nd, 2012 4:56 am ET

You recognize thus significantly in terms of this topic, made me personally imagine it from numerous numerous angles. Its like men and women aren't fascinated except it is something to accomplish with Woman gaga! Your own stuffs nice. At all times take care of it up!


Netbook Repairs   April 2nd, 2012 9:05 pm ET

Great work! This is the type of information that are supposed to be shared around the internet. Disgrace on the seek engines for now not positioning this put up higher! Come on over and seek advice from my site . Thank you =)


bed bug spray   April 4th, 2012 3:24 am ET

Great website you have here but I was curious about if you knew of any forums that cover the same topics talked about in this article? I'd really like to be a part of online community where I can get responses from other experienced individuals that share the same interest. If you have any suggestions, please let me know. Appreciate it!


pickmeindia   April 11th, 2012 7:20 am ET

Your thought processing is wonderful. The way you tell the thing is awesome. You are really a master. Great Blog!! That was amazing

Mobile Repair


email marketing lists   April 18th, 2012 5:42 pm ET

Hello my friend! I wish to say that this article is awesome, great written and include almost all vital infos. I'd like to peer extra posts like this .


surabaya cctv   June 22nd, 2012 9:28 am ET

Lovely site! I am loving it!! Will be back later to read some more. I am bookmarking your feeds also. cctv camera di surabaya


last minute   July 20th, 2012 4:01 am ET

Undeniably imagine that that you said. Your favourite reason appeared to be at the internet the easiest factor to take into account of. I say to you, I certainly get annoyed at the same time as other people think about concerns that they just do not realize about. You controlled to hit the nail upon the top and also outlined out the entire thing without having side effect , other people could take a signal. Will likely be back to get more. Thanks


camilla   July 20th, 2012 10:17 pm ET

Thank you for any other informative blog. Where else may I get that kind of information written in such an ideal means? I have a undertaking that I'm simply now running on, and I've been on the glance out for such information.


Easter Cupcake Ideas   July 22nd, 2012 3:19 am ET

you are really a good webmaster. The website loading pace is amazing. It sort of feels that you're doing any unique trick. Furthermore, The contents are masterpiece. you've done a magnificent process on this subject!


Ephesus|Ephesus Tours|Biblical Ephesus Tours|Biblical Istanbul Tours|Istanbul Tours|Istanbul History   July 23rd, 2012 6:32 am ET

Wonderful points altogether, you simply won a new reader. What might you suggest about your publish that you just made some days in the past? Any sure?


Consumer Sales   July 25th, 2012 2:15 am ET

I will immediately grasp your rss as I can not find your e-mail subscription link or newsletter service. Do you've any? Kindly permit me recognise so that I may just subscribe. Thanks.


Dedicate Servers   August 25th, 2012 1:51 pm ET

Magnificent beat ! I would like to apprentice whilst you amend your site, how can i subscribe for a weblog web site? The account helped me a appropriate deal. I were tiny bit familiar of this your broadcast offered vibrant transparent concept


Movie Review   September 8th, 2012 12:29 pm ET

Thank you, I've recently been looking for information approximately this subject for a while and yours is the greatest I've found out so far. But, what about the conclusion? Are you positive in regards to the source?|What i don't understood is in truth how you're no longer really a lot more neatly-favored than you may be now. You are very intelligent.


In home Personal training Long Island   December 7th, 2013 1:14 pm ET

I don't know how Chase Carey made as long as he did without having to charge. Nothing good in life is free. I hope this works for Hulu. I happen
to like their service. I just would pay for it.


Binary Options For Creating Small Networks   March 14th, 2014 12:37 pm ET

[...] that are small stocks without or the next emerging market only a few years away from bad deals in the first thing is how to prepare your list too much time. You'll just torture you to sit down and sell or a reason. It [...]


Cheap Day Trading Wjla   April 10th, 2014 5:33 pm ET

[...] backend solutions asked 100% money back guaranteed trade executions are put into place in order of magnitude riskier than the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) set by the Securities and Exchange Commissions if you do not get muddled at [...]


How Does A Day Trading Brokers   June 17th, 2014 3:49 pm ET

[...] to target cheaper stock market and sometimes as nano stock offerings translates into trading is having the weapons. It really cuts down on casualties. However there is a simple and you can expect [...]


Leave Your Comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.


subscribe RSS Icon
About this blog

Are you a gadgethead? Do you spend hours a day online? Or are you just curious about how technology impacts your life? In this digital age, it's increasingly important to be fluent, or at least familiar, with the big tech trends. From gadgets to Google, smartphones to social media, this blog will help keep you informed.

subscribe RSS Icon
twitter
Powered by WordPress.com VIP