[Rumor] Hulu May Require a Cable or Satellite Subscription Soon

[dgstorm]

It was fun while it lasted... This could be the statement that a lot of folks will be uttering in the near future in regards to watching TV shows on Hulu. Apparently, Hulu is being pressured by the cable and satellite companies, and sometime soon users may be required to prove they have a subscription to cable or satellite TV in order to use the Hulu service. Right now this is just a rumor, but supposedly Hulu and its content providers have been discussing this possibility since 2009, and eventually Hulu may just have to capitulate to their demands. In the mean-time, the more likely outcome could be that instead of having to prove that you already pay for cable or satellite, there will be a delay of between 1 and 30 days for you to watch the show compared to when it airs on the cable and satellite stations. Here is a quote from TechCrunch with the details,

We just talked to a source close to Hulu. According to our source, Hulu and its content providers have talked about this move toward authentication since 2009. Our source noted that Hulu has no interest in being a first mover here and that a requirement for authentication is likely still a few years out. Hulu, however, does want to be a good partner and may have to give in to its partners’ pressure soon or later. Even though an authentication requirement isn’t likely to happen right away, though, our source notes that what could happen relatively soon is that the content providers could require longer delays before their shows become available on the service for non-subscribers. Cable subscribers, under this model, would get access to a show on Hulu the next day, while non-subscribers would have to wait at least 30 days. This model would likely also apply to Hulu Plus subscribers.

If this eventually does happen to Hulu, it would pretty much ruin its whole business-model, as it would become a puppet of the cable and satellite companies. In fact, the source of this article indicates that one of the three parent companies of Hulu, Providence Equity Partners, is attempting to sell their stake in the company because they see the writing on the wall as far as the future of the service goes. What do you guys think?

Source: TechCrunch

 

[jtpowell]

They are smart to get out while they can, especially if the above happens. So I got a Hulu Plus subscription because you can't watch Hulu on a Roku without Plus. But behold!!!! The TV show that I want to watch, even though I'm paying for Plus, is not available on my device and is only viewable from a desktop computer. Hulu Plust = Canceled the next day.

 

[Laur3nNewm4n]

If we have to authenticate and prove we are subscribed to a cable provider, that completely takes away the point of me having Hulu+. The whole point of me subscribing to Hulu+ was to avoid having to pay for cable to watch TV shows. If they go to this model, or the delay is any more than a couple days, I'll definitely be unsubscribing, though will not pick up cable either. Doing this just pushes people to pirate shows again.

 

[clintro]

Well I am against forcing people to have cable, especially for networks that broadcast OTA, but Hulu has to make money to survive. It does suck that some shows are not available, I canceled my Plus as well for that reason.

So people are to spoiled and think you should get something for nothing.

 

[trestevenson]

If I have to wait more than a few days to watch a show on Hulu+ because I'm not a cable television subscriber, I'm cancelling my membership. It's bogus enough already that the company either can't or won't put out an app that works on most Android devices. Perhaps in a couple of years I'll be back to just having Netflix.

 

[johnomaz]

I was thinking about cancelling my dish service in a few months when the contract is over. I just don't watch much and when it is on, its channel surfing or watching repeats. Its a waste. I was going to get Hulu because I have a remote set up on my computer and an HDMI hookup to my TV from it too. But if they are going to require an existing service to use the service, I'll just go to each website and watch my shows from there. Hulu is a convenience because they are all there at once place. I can however just bookmark the sites I need and watch them like that. Hulu will fail if this happens.

 

[djkms]

This will definitely ruin hulu. I cancelled my directv and subscribed to hulu plus. I already wait 24 hours to watch my shows (no big deal) but if I have to wait 30 days I will find other means to watch my shows "free".

 

[Laur3nNewm4n]

So people are to spoiled and think you should get something for nothing.

Not at all. Hulu+ subscribers are paying $8 / month for Hulu+. This gives us access to TV shows and movies with ads on several devices, and most of the TV shows go up 1 day after they go on cable. If they wanted us to pay more, they'd charge more. If I weren't paying for the service, I wouldn't complain, because then, yes, I'd be getting something for nothing.

 

[Laur3nNewm4n]

This will definitely ruin hulu. I cancelled my directv and subscribed to hulu plus. I already wait 24 hours to watch my shows (no big deal) but if I have to wait 30 days I will find other means to watch my shows "free".

Exactly! By requiring Hulu users (maybe Netflix too at some point?) to prove they subscribe to cable, cable providers are just shooting themselves in the foot. People will find other ways to get their shows for little to no cost before they pay for cable.

 

[silverfang77]

This is indeed a poor business model and seems to defeat the entire purpose of Hulu. I'm glad I never signed up for their so-called Plus service.

 

[rowdyguy124]

I already pay for Hulu Plus. It's a great service I use 8-10 times a week to watch and catch up on shows with my busy schedule. It's bad enough they don't have some of the shows I want to watch available on my Roku being browser only. But if they require me to prove I pay for cable or satellite then I will drop it that day. I'll go back to TED for the shows I want.

I think the networks need to drop the cable or satellite model and offer their networks on hulu and charge for what you want to watch as long as it's affordable.

 

[osirhis]

Once again, cable and satellite providers are proving how antiquated their business is and not embracing the future of digital media. People are not wanting to pay $50+/month for cable tv on top of what they already pay for Internet access.

Instead of seeing Hulu as a opportunity, they see it as a threat to their profit margins (which are already fading as it is) and they are trying to kill it. The fact is that a growing number of people are cutting the cable so to speak and just finding their shows online. Cable tv has become the new pay per view, where we pay a premium to have access to shows as soon as they broadcast.

I, for one, have embraced the digital age and just download the shows as soon as hours after they broadcast via BitTorrent. I'll be more than happy to pay for them when companies offer a reasonable, pragmatic, and affordable service.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk 2

 

[silverfang77]

Hear hear! The cable and satellite providers need to do business the modern way or fall into desuetude.

Tappin' and talkin' with Tapatalk

 

[tjk629]

As much as I like Hulu +, if I have to prove I have cable just to watch something then I am canceling.

Some of the stuff Hulu does already ticks me off like:

- Not allowing all content to be playable on a device. Instead you have to be on a desktop.

- No HDMI out on phones.

 

[djkms]

IMO the only thing the cable companies are doing is making it worse on themselves. Do they really think that requiring Hulu subscribers to show they have a cable account is going to make the consumer want to switch to them or continue their services? If anything they are lessening the chances that I sign up with them again. Thats ok though, I talk with my money and they wont be seeing it for a very long time if ever again.