Hulu is getting itself into the same pickle that Netflix is: that is to say, they enjoyed providing a great initial service thanks to low licensing fees and low overhead, but now that they've grown, the big TV networks have become more greedy and now make far higher demands.It's not just the ads. When Hulu first appeared, it had a LOT of great shows that would get added the following day between midnight and 4am after airing. Now you can only get about half as many episodes as before without subscribing, commercials have become not just numerous and longer but also invasive (stop trying to make me play games and fill out surveys, dang it!) and less entertaining, and you often have to wait a fairly long period before getting the new episode. I think for Fox it's one or two weeks, but Syfy (unless they've already pulled all their shows altogether) started requiring a MONTH -- sorry, but I'd rather stream in lower quality than wait a MONTH for the sake of legitimacy.   See 15 other replies

I'm also talking about advertising in general. Shows with more viewers attract advertisers that are willing to pay more, and shows that don't have as many viewers end up getting canceled because their advertisers don't pay them enough.   See 15 other replies

You're talking about AdSense. It's a product of Google that is used on sites like Youtube that feature user created content. Unless it's bought out by Google, Hulu isn't going to use AdSense. And I don't see how it would work anyway, considering that Hulu doesn't have any user created content.   See 15 other replies

"Companies pay Hulu to advertise on their site. Hulu makes that money whether you watch the videos or not."

That's not how it works. When you are an advertiser, you don't just give someone money no matter how popular their site is. More hits = more ad revenue. That's why more popular Youtube partners make more than the less popular ones.

" If you're saying that subscribers shouldn't be subjected to ads because their monthly fee would offset the ad revenue, I don't know that's something you can answer without looking at their financial records"

Well it's common sense that people don't get paid 8 dollars (the price of H+ per month. I looked it up this time) by advertisers for around 15 views per month. That's insane. That's 50 cents per view. You get paid per view. Use one of Google's many sites that offer ad revenue, and see for yourself. Use blogger or Youtube.   See 15 other replies

Well that's just a weird argument. Companies pay Hulu to advertise on their site. Hulu makes that money whether you watch the videos or not. Considering that H+ has only been around for less than two years, yes, they make most of their money from ad revenue. If you're saying that subscribers shouldn't be subjected to ads because their monthly fee would offset the ad revenue, I don't know that's something you can answer without looking at their financial records. They make money from subscribers, sure, but that's offset by the fact that Hulu has to pay more to content providers for all the increased content in H+. Having not looked at their financial records, it's hard to say how much they make from anything, but I can tell you that advertising is big business and advertisers will pay top dollar to get featured on a popular site like Hulu.   See 15 other replies

There's no such thing as free content. Somebody's got to pay to get these shows made and put online; and, personally, I'd much rather let the advertisers pay for it than be forced to pay for it out of my own pocket. So, I don't mind sitting through commercials if it means that I get to watch the shows I want, whenever I want.I'm not opposed to pirating shows when there are no other options available for viewing them online without having to pay a fee for the privilege. Hollywood executives who refuse to put their shows on Hulu or other ad-supported sites have no one but themselves to blame for the fact that their shows get pirated online. But when a show is made available on Hulu or a similar site, where you can watch it legally whenever you want, and the only "price" you have to pay is to sit through a few commercials (just as if you were watching it on TV), then it makes no sense to pirate that show simply to avoid the commercials. The commercials pay the bills. We wouldn't have shows like House if it weren't for commercials. Pirating deprives the content providers of ad revenue. Do we really want to do that?We really ought to be rewarding those TV networks and studios who are willing to make their shows available for free viewing on ad-supported sites like Hulu. We ought to watch those shows here instead of pirating them. Pirating should be reserved for those shows that aren't available for free viewing on Hulu or other legitimate ad-supported sites. That will send a clear message to content providers that the best way to fight piracy is to make their content available online using the Hulu model.   See 15 other replies

I still find them easy to use, I just prefer Netflix, and I used to prefer Hulu. Hulu is still decent because of how fast it is when my connection tanks, though. But when my connection speed is better, I can watch something faster on pirate sites because the ads are off to the side of the screen, or on the bottom, or they pop up when I click the links. Better than having to take breaks from what I'm watching, IMO. And a lot of people are starting to feel the same way.

I never said I was paying for H+, and that's BECAUSE they don't take away ads for paying customers. And how am I underestimating ad revenue? I simply said they get more from 1 person subscribing than they do from 1 person viewing videos for a month.. You're surely not implying that they make more than 5 dollars (If that's the price of H+, I wouldn't know) of revenue from me watching like 15 videos a month.. That's ridiculous..   See 15 other replies