Fact: hulu.com would be number 1 on the net.

[sortie]

If they actually posted anything worth a shit in the movie section and showed more
complete crime TV shows.

They are like 650 or so on alexa even with showing only movies that were complete
losers.

I understand their position. They don't want to give the store away to
pirates.

I just think they could "replace" the pirates by offering some content
that made file sharing not even worth the risk anymore.

[CaptainHowdy]

Damm, only for the United States ...

[kristin]

Yeah, I get disappointed in the lack of full episodes they have.

[sortie]

Originally Posted by kristin

Yeah, I get disappointed in the lack of full episodes they have.

They'd probably shoot to number one in 2 weeks if they announced the were
uploading 30 full episodes of the X files.

I would 'sacrifice" a TV series to be number one on the net.

And I don't think showing it all would even hurt the series, people already
record it on the vcr and watch the shit 3 times.

I think the full episodes on the net will only get new fans addicted and make them
look for the latest episodes to come on TV.

People will always watch TV no matter what's on the net for this very simple reason :

"I aint ever going to hug up with my girlfriend in front up my lap top".

[BSleazy]

They have to pay to license those shows and movies. They aren't just randomly picking what they want to let you watch. That site is legal and I'm guessing it's not cheap to stream new blockbuster movies every week.

[kristin]

Originally Posted by BCyber

They have to pay to license those shows and movies. They aren't just randomly picking what they want to let you watch. That site is legal and I'm guessing it's not cheap to stream new blockbuster movies every week.

Right, but when it's owned by NBC, Fox, etc you can put all the shows you want on there as they own them. If you notice they are putting their back catalog of shows on there that use to be on all these stations. Shit ALF just went live on Hulu the other day.

So I would think that given some of the stations that have a partnership in this would be more shows on there.

FX for example...

[stickyfingerz]

Originally Posted by kristin

Right, but when it's owned by NBC, Fox, etc you can put all the shows you want on there as they own them. If you notice they are putting their back catalog of shows on there that use to be on all these stations. Shit ALF just went live on Hulu the other day.

So I would think that given some of the stations that have a partnership in this would be more shows on there.

FX for example...

I watch a ton of shit on Hulu. It rocks. They do, do some stuff that is interesting. For instance the first episode of Knight Rider is going to be released on hulu before it premieres on TV.

Btw Hulu uses H.264 codec the same as we use in our members areas.

[sortie]

Originally Posted by BCyber

They have to pay to license those shows and movies. They aren't just randomly picking what they want to let you watch. That site is legal and I'm guessing it's not cheap to stream new blockbuster movies every week.

Of couse that's the problem.

But seeing that top internet sites are valued in the BILLIONS!!!!

They could fork out 1/2 a billion on this shit and increase their net worth and
value of their stock.

How many shares does the company have laying around that it could dispose of
without losing leverage? When the stock rises they can make profit from selling
those shares.

They also run commercials and are selling this time.
Do you think they can charge more if the site is number one on the net?

[kristin]

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

I watch a ton of shit on Hulu. It rocks. They do, do some stuff that is interesting. For instance the first episode of Knight Rider is going to be released on hulu before it premieres on TV.

Btw Hulu uses H.264 codec the same as we use in our members areas.

I like that they have added Comedy Central so I can watch Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report.

[mynameisjim]

It's not that simple. Advertising rates on the internet are WAAAAAY lower than on TV. If networks dump their shows on Hulu, they risk losing quite a bit of money. It will take some time for the market to settle and the revenues to be figured out. But it will come.

I've watched a few movies on Hulu and usually catch the Daily Show there since I always miss it on TV.

[sortie]

From an advertizers stand point :

If I go to a network to buy ads then I want the network that reaches the most
people.

I don't really care how those people are reached just as long as my product is not
shown in a context that is not favorable to the product.

hulu.com is another extension of a network to me as an advertizer so I would
want some ads on some highly viewed videos. So I would hope to get the network
to stream my ads online on "The X Files".

[stickyfingerz]

I know it sounds girly, but I kick the laptop on and soak in the tub and watch hulu...

[sortie]

Originally Posted by mynameisjim

It's not that simple. Advertising rates on the internet are WAAAAAY lower than on TV. If networks dump their shows on Hulu, they risk losing quite a bit of money. It will take some time for the market to settle and the revenues to be figured out. But it will come.

I've watched a few movies on Hulu and usually catch the Daily Show there since I always miss it on TV.

They can bundle internet rates with their regular rates for TV/Net packages
and make thier money from existing accounts that aint gonna risk turning it down
and then their competitors ads blow up on the net and now all slots are full so they
can't get in and compete.

[notoldschool]

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

I know it sounds girly, but I kick the laptop on and soak in the tub and watch hulu...

Gotcha. LOL, as if it wasnt obvious.