dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
18
share rss forum feed
« Goodbye Hulu
This is a sub-selection from Joint Venture


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
reply to wavesound

Re: Joint Venture

It seems everyone wants all their cable channels on the internet and avialable for nothing which is hardly realistic. You have to make chocies. Either pay the high prices the cable/sat companies charge or cancell and live with more limited choices. All these networks are going to go with the delivery method that makes them the best ROI. If offering stuff online ADDS to the bottom line, sure they'll offer it. If online becomes more profitable than the current methods of distribution you bet that's where they'll go to.

TheGhost
Premium
join:2003-01-03
Lake Forest, IL
said by 88615298:

It seems everyone wants all their cable channels on the internet and avialable for nothing which is hardly realistic. You have to make chocies. Either pay the high prices the cable/sat companies charge or cancell and live with more limited choices. All these networks are going to go with the delivery method that makes them the best ROI. If offering stuff online ADDS to the bottom line, sure they'll offer it. If online becomes more profitable than the current methods of distribution you bet that's where they'll go to.
The thing is, they are already there - Hulu is just deciding what type of device you can watch it on.

I wonder if this is more of a network dig at Google (wanting them to fail) vs. actually trying to "protect" content. Some stated it works with Boxee, so how would a Google browser be any different?


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
said by TheGhost:

said by 88615298:

It seems everyone wants all their cable channels on the internet and avialable for nothing which is hardly realistic. You have to make chocies. Either pay the high prices the cable/sat companies charge or cancell and live with more limited choices. All these networks are going to go with the delivery method that makes them the best ROI. If offering stuff online ADDS to the bottom line, sure they'll offer it. If online becomes more profitable than the current methods of distribution you bet that's where they'll go to.
The thing is, they are already there - Hulu is just deciding what type of device you can watch it on.

I wonder if this is more of a network dig at Google (wanting them to fail) vs. actually trying to "protect" content. Some stated it works with Boxee, so how would a Google browser be any different?
I'm pretty sure the networks make more money via cable/sat or even OTA than via Hulu at this point.

TheGhost
Premium
join:2003-01-03
Lake Forest, IL
Never meant to imply that Hulu provided more revenue. I was trying to say it doesn't make much sense to stop someone from looking at something with one browser vs. another, if they are both showing the adds. Kind of like if they kicked someone off who used Opera, Firefox, or Safari.

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink
reply to 88615298
said by 88615298:

It seems everyone wants all their cable channels on the internet and avialable for nothing which is hardly realistic. You have to make chocies. Either pay the high prices the cable/sat companies charge or cancell and live with more limited choices. All these networks are going to go with the delivery method that makes them the best ROI. If offering stuff online ADDS to the bottom line, sure they'll offer it. If online becomes more profitable than the current methods of distribution you bet that's where they'll go to.
I don't you'd find anyone who wants their channels "for nothing".

They just don't want to pay several times for the same content, or pay for content / channels / networks that they don't watch.

Note that this doesn't mean ala carte would cost less - nor does it need to. Americans will pay more for actual or perceived quality. They will pay for choice.


skuv

@rr.com
reply to TheGhost
said by TheGhost:

Never meant to imply that Hulu provided more revenue. I was trying to say it doesn't make much sense to stop someone from looking at something with one browser vs. another, if they are both showing the adds. Kind of like if they kicked someone off who used Opera, Firefox, or Safari.
They don't want to make it too easy for people with a real television to watch Hulu on that television. Because then they will not watch the original airing of the show and add to the ad revenue numbers, where they make most of their money from.

It sounds stupid, but it's not stupid to the people that want to make as much money as possible.


aaronwt
Premium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
said by skuv :

said by TheGhost:

Never meant to imply that Hulu provided more revenue. I was trying to say it doesn't make much sense to stop someone from looking at something with one browser vs. another, if they are both showing the adds. Kind of like if they kicked someone off who used Opera, Firefox, or Safari.
They don't want to make it too easy for people with a real television to watch Hulu on that television. Because then they will not watch the original airing of the show and add to the ad revenue numbers, where they make most of their money from.

It sounds stupid, but it's not stupid to the people that want to make as much money as possible.
It makes perfect sense. If I could pay $10 a month and get every show in better quality audio and video on my TV without recording it from the local station, I would not be watching my local station anymore.