Slashdot Mirror


Hulu Lowers Prices After Netflix Raises Theirs (variety.com)

Coincidentally, as Netflix raised their prices last week, Hulu decided to lower theirs. The streaming service is now offering a plan, which includes commercials, for $5.99 per month for the first year -- a short-term promotion aimed at luring new subs with the kickoff of the fall television and Hulu's expanded TV library lineup. Variety reports: Hulu's special offer for the limited-commercials plan is available through Jan. 9, 2018, only to new or returning Hulu subs. After one year, the regular $7.99 monthly price will kick in. Hulu offers a commercial-free option for $12 per month, and a live TV service (which includes access to original series like Emmy-winning "The Handmaid's Tale" and on-demand titles) for $40 monthly. A Hulu rep said the company's new promo is intended to draft off the fall 2017 TV season. As it looks for another original series on the order of "Handmaid's Tale" -- so far its only breakout hit -- Hulu has inked deals to bring thousands of current and older TV shows to the platform to armor-up in its battle with rivals Netflix and Amazon Prime.

59 of 108 comments (clear)

  1. Lower? by Quirkz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sorry, but "new promotional rates" is not lowering prices.

    1. It doesn't reduce anything for anyone who is already paying.
    2. It's a promotional rate. The regular rate is the same.

    So, it's a temporary sale to lure in new subscribers. That's different.

    1. Re:Lower? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Lowering prices means lower prices for everyone. That is clearing not the case here.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re:Lower? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      And it only applies to the lowest tier. The normal version without any commercials is same as Netflix price. The more expensive "live TV" version is kind of useless without a DVR like feature (we've had DVRs and VCRs so long now that few people watch TV live anymore except for sports).

    3. Re:Lower? by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      No it doesn't. It would mean everyone is they said lowering for everyone. You can't add words to something and then say it means the same thing,

      That said, until cable reduces costs for internet only plans, most people won't officially cut the cord.

      I have cable. I never watch it, but I have it since it costs more or the same to not have it.

    4. Re:Lower? by JackieBrown · · Score: 2

      You know, there are a ton of Trump stories on slashdot without forcing this discussion to become a Trump one.

    5. Re:Lower? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Actually, I took the headline to mean they were lowering them for everyone. Mostly because it juxtaposes them to Netflix prices which got risen for everyone. A promotional price is not 'lowering prices', it is having a promotion.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    6. Re:Lower? by JohnFen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, Quirkz is correct: a temporary promotional price is not a "lowered price" in the commonly understood sense. It's a "sale price".

    7. Re: Lower? by dbialac · · Score: 1

      They need it. They beat their UI ober the head with an ugly stick and decided to get rid of any kind of usability at the same time. People are threatening to cancel right and left. My own subscription expires at midnight tonight.

    8. Re:Lower? by rtb61 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't understand people who pay for commercial, pay for someone to enter their lounge room and scream at them about shit they don't want. Once you start going largely commercial free, those commercial when you occasionally come across, come across as extremely aggressive and loud, hugely undesirable and really put you off products. There are products they I totally avoid as a result of aggressive commercial placement and a very loud and aggravating style. If people behaved like commercial did, wander into your house to demand you buy product, would you tolerate it or would you throw them out. I can not understand why people think they will be able to sell me product by actively trying to force me to watch their POS commercials. Every time I buy stuff, I check other people's NEGATIVE opinions an reviews of the product, fuck you commercials, you live or die on how badly you have treated existing customers, that is it.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    9. Re:Lower? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 2

      They only lowered prices for new customers and only for 12 months.

      Saying they "lowered prices" is grossly incorrect because all existing customers will not see a lowered rate.

      Hey, bread's been lowered from $2 to $1.

      Okay, I want some.

      Oh-- it's $2 for you.

      But you lowered prices?!?!

      Yes- but not for you.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    10. Re:Lower? by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      You can't add words to something and then say it means the same thing,

      Unless those words are implied. If there are no qualifications on the sentence, then the implication was, actually, that the prices were lowered for everyone (or at least every customer buying the products affected.)

      What you're saying by saying "We're lowering prices for everyone" isn't the same as "We're lowering prices" is that "We're lowering prices" is the same as "We're lowering prices, but only for a small set of people."

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    11. Re:Lower? by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      But it is still lower for the people they sell it at 1 dollar to.

      If they said "1 dollar for all customers" then you'd have a point.

      And considering Hulu is upfront about this (it's the article from the Verge that uses the phrasing you find deceptive), not sure what the problem is in any case

    12. Re:Lower? by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Is that the live streaming one? I have no interest in that, but I like their $11.99 ad-free one.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    13. Re:Lower? by unrtst · · Score: 1

      And considering Hulu is upfront about this (it's the article from the Verge that uses the phrasing you find deceptive), not sure what the problem is in any case

      IMO, the problem is that many of us are sick of shitty editorials that not only add no value, but get worse because they provide misleading or incorrect information.

      Someone took time to write, "Coincidentally, as Netflix raised their prices last week, Hulu decided to lower theirs", as a summary of some points from the article, but that's wrong. It leads those with existing Hulu contracts to expect to pay less for the next year, which will drive far more interest into the article than if it read, "Coincidentally, as Netflix raised their prices last week, Hulu announced a short-term promotional sale for new or returning Hulu subscriptions".

      No wonder they didn't phrase it correctly... it's barely news. Passing on "news" of a promotional sale is just advertising (or a slashvertisment, as it's known here).

      I like this site, a lot, but crap like this should be corrected ASAP. I know I can't really trust Variety to get all their facts straight, but I do expect the one or two phrases that slashdot adds in summaries to at least be accurate (grammar, spelling, jokes, opinions... I can deal with all those).

    14. Re:Lower? by Sporkinum · · Score: 1

      True. Not only that, you used to be able to watch a fair amount on PC with an unpaid account. Now they have nothing. I checked that a couple of months ago to see if anything had changed.. it hadn't. I had lost interest in it a few years ago because too many ads, that they repeated over and over for too long, and mostly shit content.

      --
      "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    15. Re:Lower? by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      They dropped the free tier a while back.

      Basically it was all stuff available from the networks anyway.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    16. Re:Lower? by barc0001 · · Score: 1

      Also useless considering that Hulu's potential user base is 300m people in the US, whereas Netflix has a global potential user base. Until Hulu is available elsewhere they're fighting over a tiny piece of the pie. As one of the non US Netflix subscribers, Hulu could offer to GIVE me $500/mo to ditch Netflix for them and I still probably wouldn't do it because I can't actually use Hulu. Well, maybe I would do that for a few months and then go binge Netflix afterward... because that's a lot of money to just stop watching Netflix for a few months.

    17. Re:Lower? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      No. If Hulu advertise that they have lowered their prices but then doesn't give lower prices to all customers then they are engaging in bait and switch fraudulent behavior. Same as if the dealership says they are selling trucks for a certain price and then only actually sells those trucks to new customers.

      If you say, "Hulu lowered prices" the default reasonable expectation is that they lowered prices generally. Not that they lowered prices for new customers who will be a tiny number compared to their current customer base.

      There's no problem. It's the usual mangled Slashdot header. It should have said, "Hulu lowers prices to new customers".

      Instead it said something that didn't match reality... as it often does.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  2. Seems only fair by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    which includes commercials, for $5.99 per month for the first year

    I pay $5.99 for the privilege of watching your commercials?

    Tell you what, I'll sign up when the CEO of Hulu comes and sucks my hairy balls. And I'll only charge him $5.99 and he has to listen to me talk about my fantasy football team and the cute thing my cat did. For three hours. While he sucks my hairy balls.

    Honestly, the cheek of these bastards. Do they not know how the whole idea of "commercials" works?

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re: Seems only fair by corychristison · · Score: 1

      It's exactly the same as the cable companies do...

    2. Re: Seems only fair by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Free with ads, or monthly fee with no ads.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    3. Re: Seems only fair by markdavis · · Score: 4, Interesting

      >"It's exactly the same as the cable companies do..."

      No it isn't, not even close. With cable, anyone with any brain uses a DVR (I use a TiVo) and skips the commercials. Streaming, on the other hand, can FORCE commercial viewing, and that is exactly what Hulu does- forced commercials.

      And with cable/DVR, you can record what you want for later viewing, and without a live Internet connection. Streaming video and your Internet goes down? Too bad. No more video.

      And with cable/DVR, I can record hundreds of hours of video and it doesn't impact my Internet speed at all. And my Internet usage doesn't impact video at all. Never any dropping of resolution spontaneously, no missing frames, no freezing.

      And with cable/DVR, I can pause, play, rewind, fast forward, and frame-by-frame effectively with my video. And it does so instantly- no lag, no "loading", no hiccups.

      So no, this is not "exactly the same as cable."

      I don't care if Hulu with commercials was FREE, if it has forced commercials, neither I nor many others will use it. I haven't watched commercials (unless I WANT to) for over 16 years and I will NEVER go back.

    4. Re: Seems only fair by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      Awesome. You should set up a video service with your model.

      I won't be subscribing to another commercial channel but it doesn't mean that it doesn't have value for a lot of people. And 5 dollars is cheaper than a lot of cable plans (which usually include commercials.)

    5. Re: Seems only fair by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Wasn't their old model free with ads, and monthly fee with ads? This definitely caused a lot of people to prefer Netflix at the time.

    6. Re: Seems only fair by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      And the drawbacks to cable/DVR - no on-demand shows (except a few curated ones), a limited selection of shows at any time, amazingly overpriced subscription fees, and terrible service.

      I don't like commercials, but compared to cable/DVR I'd rather have Hulu with commercials. And Hulu has the option to pay more for no commercials anyway, same price as Netflix. The super-cheap option is subsidized by commercials.

      And I do think the "subsidized by commercials" is a bad deal. If they make enough money on broadcast TV with commercials to build and maintain thousands of transmitters across the country with local staff and local programming, then someone should be able to offer a free streaming service paid for 100% with commercials.

      (I suspect there is Hollywood's finger in the mix here; for broadcast TV you get a lower quality signal; but with streaming there's a high quality signal and there's a morbid dread in Hollywood that someone might be able to make a copy for free. So Hollywood is going to charge more money for HDTV shows than broadcast quality shows.)

    7. Re: Seems only fair by markdavis · · Score: 2

      >"I don't like commercials, but compared to cable/DVR I'd rather have Hulu with commercials."

      Choice is a good thing. Free markets give consumers more of what they want. I, for one, am glad Hulu exists even though I have no interest in at least their commercial model, because it spurs more competition. In the past we had none and it is about time the cable monopolies fall under real pressure.

    8. Re: Seems only fair by markdavis · · Score: 2

      >"Complete BS. What sort of fucking retard are you? A free market is by definition not required to do anything for the consumer. That's the whole fucking definition."

      Um, if they don't give the consumer what they want, another company will. Or do you think Communism works better?

      >"Complete shit for brains..."

      Look in the mirror, foul-mouthed coward...

    9. Re: Seems only fair by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Yup! I tried their free service, and it totally sucked. There was NFW I'd try their paid stuff, until they offered the ad-free service.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    10. Re: Seems only fair by unrtst · · Score: 1

      The free version on PC's has just as many commercials (AFAICT) as the $7.99/month version on TV connected systems (roku, appletv, firetv, xbox, ps3/ps4, etc). IMO, they're charging because they can get away with it on those systems, and they don't feel they could get away with it on the PC. They even made a hulu desktop version that had built in support for remotes and was free, but so few people have media centers, and those that do are usually capable of finding the programs elsewhere for free (pirate), so they don't charge them.

      Why not an intermediate option with fewer commercials but that has a low subscriber fee?

      That'd be swell, but that's not what's happening. For it to be an intermediate option, there would have to be a lower option, but they don't provide a 100% ad supported version for streaming devices (roku/etc).

  3. apples and oranges? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    To even mention the limited commercials price is extremely misleading.

    What I see in the article is that Netflix offers a $7.99 / month plan for a single stream non-HD commercial-free stream or $10.99 / month for the standard HD plan, and Hulu's lowest commercial free option is apparently $12 / month.

    So, the article says Hulu is more expensive than Netflix unless you're willing to listen to commercials at which time it becomes the same price as the lowest price commercial-free Netflix plan (after the bait-and-switch promotion completes).

  4. Re:2017: Paying to watch TV by known_coward_69 · · Score: 2

    does this magical antenna thing work on your phone or tablet?

  5. Stick your commercials you know where by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hulu would have to pay me $5.99 a month.

    1. Re:Stick your commercials you know where by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      If the amount of money they say my watching commcercials can earn companies, they owe me $10/month as the very least.

  6. And Increased Ads by dcollins · · Score: 2

    I noticed that Hulu recently increased the numbers ads in between breaks: I believe from 4 to 5 now. It seems close to interminable. In some cases recently I've finished my dinner and just shut off the program before it could get back.

    Since it's inception they've been ratcheting up the ads per break. I think 2 to begin with, now up to 5. I wonder where the end-point is.

    --
    We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    1. Re:And Increased Ads by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Holy crap. Broadcast TV doesn't even show that many ads at the breaks.

    2. Re:And Increased Ads by tmjva · · Score: 1

      It isn't the ads, its the reduced content over time they used to offer.  Show I've seen over the years simply "go missing" what's up with that?

      --
      Tracy Johnson
      Old fashioned text games hosted below:
      http://empire.openmpe.com/
      BT
  7. Torrents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Are offering a very competitive rate. You pay $0 per month, which comes out to $0 per year. Torrents are also commercial free. They offer an impressive library of new and old content including access to original series like Emmy-winning "The Handmaid's Tale." Compared to Netflix and Hulu offerings this is an impressive deal indeed, and it's not some kind of teaser rate that expires after a few months. The $0 fees for torrents are going to last well beyond the 2017 season.

    1. Re:Torrents by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

      And is this "Torrents" thing limited to the U.S.A. like Hulu, or is it available world-wide?

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  8. Re:2017: Paying to watch TV by XXeR · · Score: 1

    does this magical antenna thing work on your phone or tablet?

    I don't necessarily agree with everything else the gp said, but with Tablo you can watch antenna TV on your mobile device:

    https://www.tablotv.com/blog/a...

  9. New Hulu Interface driving people away by FerociousFerret · · Score: 2

    I think this promotion is to try to deal with the massive rejection of the "New Hulu Experience", i.e. the new interface that sucks and has received massive negative feedback. Hulu has no plans to go back to the previous interface. Many are voting with their wallet, myself included, and dropping Hulu.

    1. Re:New Hulu Interface driving people away by mschaffer · · Score: 1

      I know I am seriously thinking of dropping Hulu because of their horrible UI.
      Probably will next week---after getting my antenna installed.

    2. Re: New Hulu Interface driving people away by junk · · Score: 2

      Came here to day this. My gut reaction is that this has nothing to do with Netflix and everything to do with losing subscribers. I dropped because of the new UI. It's not just a "change is bad" reaction either. If the new changes were mostly usable, I would adapt. I left because bad change is bad and I'll keep my couple of bucks and put it into an external antenna. The mohu does OK but now it's time to get serious.

  10. The Ads make this a non-starter for me. by Halo5 · · Score: 1

    The whole point of moving to streaming is to get away from the 10-15 minutes of commercials. It's way past the point of ridiculous. I can't even watch regular TV anymore. Netflix+Prime has allowed me to ditch the ads, and I ain't never going back!

    If Hulu is ADDING to the number of ads, I don't really expect them to be around much longer...

    --
    665: The mark on the forehead of Satan's slightly less evil brother, Stan.
    1. Re:The Ads make this a non-starter for me. by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      I haven't have any complaints with their $11.99 ad-free service. The extra money is well worth it.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    2. Re:The Ads make this a non-starter for me. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I love being able to watch a 1 hour show in 45 minutes the day after it airs.

      This time of year it's the service I use most.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  11. Un-FUBAR the interface now by nobuddy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All they need to do now us roll back that useless FUBAR interface they pushed out recently. Thats why they are hemorrhaging subscribers.

    1. Re:Un-FUBAR the interface now by gymbrown · · Score: 2

      If you want to see what shows that are on your watch list you can only see 2 shows instead of 12. A quick google will take you to 100s of negative comments but maybe 1 or 2 positive ones.

      --
      Embrace the future.
  12. So torn by JohnFen · · Score: 1

    On the one hand, I'm happy to see anyone taking Netflix down a notch.

    On the other hand, Hulu is the team effort of Disney, Fox, and Comcast -- and I can't really cheer for any of those guys.

  13. Re:Nope by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 2

    It has a commercial-free tier, with some network-exclusive content. That was the only time they interested me. I'd have never paid them to watch commercials. Once you go commercial free, you really can't go back.

    Only it was "mostly" commercial free (a few exceptions). And they also pasted a bug in the corner of the screen advertising the local affiliate station, which was distracting to me (that's an awesome way to make torrents look better than paid subscriptions). And I found I just didn't watch all that much TV anyhow, certainly not enough to justify subscribing to yet another streaming service (which may very well happen to Disney as well).

    So, no more Hulu for me.

    --
    Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  14. So they want a subscription by waspleg · · Score: 1

    AND want you to watch ads? Huh. That sounds familiar for some reason ... and equally odious.

  15. Re:Nope by JohnFen · · Score: 1

    Hulu has 17% of the market and climbing. Some people clearly want it.

  16. Re:Nope by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    Netflix also got there by having streaming early on that was better than Hulu and without commercials.

  17. Re:2017: Paying to watch TV by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    It's $10/month for me, no big deal. And broadcast really doesn't have that much. Ie, Doctor Who, Walking Dead, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, and so forth. Sure, wait long enough on broadcast and stuff shows up in syndication, and you will get "edited for content/time" movies as well.

    If I didn't have internet then your argument might make sense as adding in the boradband capable ISP is by far the bulk of the cost for streaming.

    Of course, you could be like where my mother is; the internet is terrible and digital TV can't be received except for one lousy channel. So paying for the lowest tier of satellite is needed to get the local television stations.

  18. And I will continue paying for Netflix by No+Longer+an+AC · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But I will never pay for Hulu.

    Netflix isn't perfect and the price increase is mildly annoying I guess. One more dollar a month? I can deal with it. Hulu with no commercials is still more expensive and I still haven't finished watching everything I want to watch on Netflix.

    And compared to what I was paying for cable before I cut the cord it's completely insignificant.

    But why is Netflix raising their prices by a whole dollar considered news anyway?

    Is it news when Comcast raises the price of their service by more than that or when they drop a bunch of channels from the basic plan?

    One thing that's great about Netflix is I know how much it will cost from month to month and if there's ever a price increase Slashdot or some other internet news will warn me about it - lord knows Netflix never talks to me. I don't even know if they have a current email address.

    But with cable TV you never know what your monthly bill will be and if they tell you one price you know they're neglecting a bunch of add-on fees and it will go up or channels will be removed.

    With Netflix, I guess I'll lose Disney movies but I haven't even mustered up the patience to watch that Star Wars movie that's on Netflix because there's other stuff I'd rather watch.

  19. JUST cancelled by MrDoh! · · Score: 2

    After the change to the watchlist that instead of just being the programs I wanted to watch in the order I wanted to watch, setting + on a season, I just got so frustrated with their new watchlist that I 'tuned out'. Sent them a 'please return it how it was, it worked' message and got the "no, you're wrong, this is far better way to manage your subscriptions" response. Then not having anything new to watch for months on end, but it dropping things I'd previously subbed to. Then adding programs I didn't want to watch in my list because they thought I might be interested, when I don't even speak spanish, why's it offering me programmes to watch in a language I don't understand? And the ads, oh my goodness the ads. The same ones over and over and over and over. I'd try to adblock but it stopped the site working (fair enough, they need ad revenue I guess), then offered a 'watch without the ads' deal, but I feel the prior months of the same ads over and over and over was just torture to make the new package seems better value. And then those ads that forced you to do some survey. I want to passively watch, not start answering questions on the name of the actor in Magnum PI. And I can't quit/skip unless I mash a few buttons for a bit. I'm just... burned out. Gave up on hulu. It could/should have been great, and there's bound to be later sites that do what early Hulu did, that'll be popular. But what Hulu ended up being, an ad network you have to pay for, that's slow and clunky to use, keeps getting worse every few months, nope, cancelled a month ago.

    --
    Waiting for an amusing sig.
  20. Limited commercials? by jdharm · · Score: 1

    What is this "limited commercials" of which Hulu speaks? I've got that subscription and a single 45 minute episode of Shark Tank has 6 commercail breaks of 2 minutes each. How is 20% of the running time being commercials being "limited"?

  21. Re:2017: Paying to watch TV by Chameleon+Man · · Score: 1

    You are poor and can't pay $11 a month to NOT watch commercials AND have a wider selection of content? Who's the idiot now? I don't know if you're trolling or not, but your "DROPS MIC" bit is super cringy. No wonder you posted as AC.

  22. Hulu is struggling to keep users by Ghosthorseman · · Score: 1

    As others have said, Hulu is offering promotional prices to mitigate losses after an enormous interface blunder. Hulu split their content flagging into 2 systems, Watchlist and MyStuff. But the two systems don't talk to each. The result is that users can "save" shows via the web, but they can't see those shows on their Roku. The same is true in the other direction. Thousands of folks are going to their Roku's, discovering that the interface is new, clunky, and all of their shows and content are missing. These price changes are a mitigation to avoid large subscription losses.

    1. Re:Hulu is struggling to keep users by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      I didn't notice any missing content on the Roku. But the other day, I was on the iPad, and a bunch of my stuff appeared to be missing.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.