Hulu to charge for TV show episodes in 2010

This is kind of a misnomer.

Hulu will NOT charge for current shows as provided by NBC, Fox, ABC, as those networks have already committed to airing their programs free at their websites and Hulu will still handle their content in that way.

 

However, older catalog programming (shows no longer on the air) as well as cable-based programming (think anything from FX, USA, etc.) is likely to be amongst the "fees attached" groups, with Hulu considering monthly "plans"

"Misnomer," I do not think that means what you think it means.

This is far from any kind of official announcement, and there's no indication at all of what services or content they may charge for. I can only imagine the conclusions people are going to jump to.

I'll look it up, but I always thought misnomer=an inappropriate assumption of a name or titling.. The thread is a misnomer.  It's an incorrect name/term for what's going to happen.  There will not be a subscription service as people like to think of it.  "Hulu to charge for TV Show Episodes" is being spread through lots of blogs, but everywhere that it's actually being followed up on, they are negotiating premium content.. so the title vs. what is being considered aren't the same.. been a long time since college, but I always thought that was the application :)

http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/10/22/most-people-shouldnt-make-too-much-about-no-free-hulu-in-2010/31223

Patrick says they will charge for episodes.  That isn't what's being proposed.  They will offer premium content.

?

the speculation of hulu charging for anything at this point is a problem for its service......

I don't care what the true meaning of all this ends up being, free Hulu is the only Hulu I'll ever watch.

 

free Hulu = I'll continue to watch things I missed on TV

$$ Hulu = I'll go back to my torrent sites for things I missed.

 

I'm not going to pay Hulu or any other website to watch shows that I have already paid for at home.

Inconceivable!

Until they can stream real HD content, Hulu is a non-starter for me.  I'm not inclined at watching blurry TV anymore.  Not in this day and age.

I will hate this very much, but in some way, I will be suckered into this. I am very dependent on Hulu these days, making it a bit easier to keep up with multiple shows, and thus saving me some money from Netflix for the time being.

And I find it to work a lot better than some of the network's sites, which requires the downloading of some retarded video plug-in that never works for me on my computer (like ABC and CW).

Microsoft's new "Internet TV" now out of Beta and a full part of Win7MC is actually pretty damn slick.

Agreed, but it barely has any full episode content.  I mean hell, if MS can't even get full episodes of the content from MSNBC, why bother doing it? 

Did you notice that changed last night though?

 

Full seasons of all "Mcguyver" seasons of a bunch of CBS shows, live MSNBC, and a few other things were added overnight.  I have a feeling they intend to really back this.

Nope, didn't notice, I'll have to check it out.

Full episodes of MacGyver shows strong support by Microsoft?

BTW, Hanson, I purchased a HDHomeRun. Love it. Paired up with Win7's Media Center, it's gold. You'd mentioned having one back in one of the threads. I'd been looking at various TV tuner cards and while weeding through the reviews, always found something that made me leery. The HDHomeRun only does ClearQAM (or ATSC), but a significant portion of my TV viewing is (surprisingly) network shows these days, so it works reasonably well.

As for Hulu, I've never really used it as a significant portion of the content is not captioned. I can put up with the lower quality, but I need captions for my family. Depending on the subscription model, I might be interested in what amounts to on-demand viewing. The HDHomeRun works, but I do still have to make sure that computer is on at the time shows need recording. Hulu would avoid all that.

I'd also enjoy being able to watch cable shows like Sons of Anarchy, Mad Men via some type of inexpensive on-demand as the HDHomeRun can't record those channels.

As for other alternatives, they certainly exist, but I'm a big believer in supporting (to a degree) the people who give me a product I enjoy. So as long as the cost isn't what I (subjectively) consider excessive, I'd rather pay for legitimate means of distribution rather than seek out alternatives.

I just used that as an example.  Actually, I'd say the fact that they are now keeping full eps of: CSI, 30 Rock, NCIS, and live news feeds in the internet TV area are a better sign, but I like to look at what people are using for the off-air (content which you can't find except for online or through the purchase of DVDs)

by "invite only"? Seems like a business model doomed for failure....

I don't understand the reason behind an 'invite' system.

If people already have accounts, and want more content, why wouldn't you sell it?

Unless it's their marketing department's way of making folks feel special for paying them $9.99 a month.

 

Check their homepage, there's a Hulu + walkthrough.

Kind of embarrassing for them, when you mouse over, the first 'tag' you see is: 'Hulu sucks more every day'

From what I can see, the invite system is because the service is still in a sort of late beta. They're graduall increasing membership to make sure the system can handle the load, etc. Getting an invite is easy as you just go to the plus tab and request one. It's not like you have to know a VIP or something to get one.

Lets see - pay 10 bucks a month, and I still have to sit through ads? What kind of chump do you think I am, Hulu?

 

Free + ads = Hulu

$10/month + ads = Fuku

The invite system is limited.  It's because the terminal clients, which are coming in October and December (for PS3, Wii, XBOX360, Windows7 MC) aren't available.

So, right now, it's web-only, and not all of the content is there.  So if you are willing to be a guinea pig, and use it, you can get an invite easily and quickly.  They should have said "apply for beta" which would have been more accurate.

 

Because of that, you have to volunteer.

 

Actually, having checked:

 

PS3 availability in full seems to be September, Wii sometime later, XBOX360 and Win7MC are due Christmas2010/Jan 2011

Apparently, this is more for those who a) don't have a DVR, b) don't have cable, and c) don't mind watching on their laptop/monitor (unless you have a HTPC hooked up to your TV).  I guess $10/mo is cheaper than getting cable + DVR.

 

The elephant in the room is an even more cost effective method.

 

BTW, this could be much more value added if you could stream to your phone.  That would make the $10 much more attractive.

 

But yeah, the commercials thing is just... nonsensical.

Problem is, without addressing the elephant in the room.. the elephant in the room (with regards to anything broadcast over free airwaves) has already had it's day in the supreme court.. and one side lost.  In 1983.  Now, for paid-network content, people are right.. but the networks are struggling with how to get around that ruling now, and fear of really trying to corner the elephant, and whether or not they could get another bite in front of a different supreme court and get a different result.

Ah ... but that's the point: You *can* stream to your phone!  At least, if your phone is an iPhone 4 or a iPhone 3GS running iOS4.

 

As far as "paying for commercials":  You're already doing that if you pay for a cable or Direct TV service!

 

Perhaps I should have stated, "stream to MY phone" instead.  I must have skipped the iPhone/iPad part.

 

For the simple sacrifice of not watching live, I can skip the commercials.  I cannot do so with Hulu.