cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Hulu price increases TWICE this year!

JTLance
Explorer
Explorer
I decided that the costs outweigh the advantages. No new services, even after they just CUT SERVICES....They raise prices?

Hello to alternatives!

"We’re reaching out to let you know that the price of your Hulu (No Ads) + Live TV plan will increase from $50.99/month to $60.99/month on Wednesday, December 18, 2019."

It was $40 this year....
25 REPLIES 25

fj12ryder
Explorer II
Explorer II
Beaker wrote:
Does anybody know how much time the networks commit to commercials?


I did time the commercial time on Gold Rush one night-21 minutes.

If I see a movie that I like on TV, I will buy it used on Ebay for 4-5 dollars rather than watch all the commercials on TV movies.
Amen, by the time they speed it up, and put in all the commercials, the movie has lost all continuity. That's one good thing about TCM channel.
Howard and Peggy

"Don't Panic"

Beaker
Explorer
Explorer
Does anybody know how much time the networks commit to commercials?


I did time the commercial time on Gold Rush one night-21 minutes.

If I see a movie that I like on TV, I will buy it used on Ebay for 4-5 dollars rather than watch all the commercials on TV movies.
2008 Silverado 2500HD Duramax
2010 Cruiser 26RK

Bill_Satellite
Explorer II
Explorer II
While you might have a mobile internet connection in most RV's, the amount of data necessary to Google the local restaurant scene and use Google Maps pales in comparison to the amount of data required to make streaming your primary source for TV content. The difference in cost must be factored in and accounted for. They do not cost the same amount of money (unless you are timmac with a business, unlimited connection that he doesn't have to pay for).
What I post is my 2 cents and nothing more. Please don't read anything into my post that's not there. If you disagree, that's OK.
Can't we all just get along?

T18skyguy
Explorer
Explorer
fj12ryder wrote:
T18skyguy wrote:
I have OTA with Roku streaming Sling, Netflix, Amazon prime. Sure, the cost may be approaching cable, but at least I'm paying for what I want to see instead of silly cable bundles with home shopping, food channel etc. I'm a news addict, so I need that on demand and am willing to pay for it.
You mean that everything on those channels/boxes you mentioned is worth watching? I really find that kind of hard to believe. So you're still paying for content you don't want/watch.

The thing that really irritates me about cable is that I have to pay a surcharge for sports' channels. I HATE professional sports/advertising, but I cannot opt out of that surcharge. Stupid.

Of course not everything is worth watching, but it's far worse with satellite or cable. I get what your saying about sports. DTV use to charge $300 for their football package. I like football, but not enough to get ripped off for it. The nice thing about Sling/Netflix is there's plenty of good programming you can watch without any commercials. That's worth money to me since it saves so much time. Does anybody know how much time the networks commit to commercials? That's a key reason I went OTA. With cable/satellite, your essentially paying them to show you commercials. If I'm going to have to watch commercials, might as well be free.
Retired Anesthetist. LTP. Pilot with mechanic/inspection ratings. Between rigs right now.. Wife and daughter. Four cats which we must obey.

way2roll
Nomad III
Nomad III
austinjenna wrote:
I would guess that most folks are like me and have had internet a long time before going to streaming. Even with DTV I had internet so no I don't pay that internet cost for streaming.


Agreed. Most already have internet so it does not come into play.


x3 - Internet is used for so much more than streaming, it's a utility and I would argue most people are going to have internet regardless if they have SAT or cable or stream. This is a utility cost and to me if you can leverage that utility to stream and replace a SAT or cable subscription you are way ahead of the game. Also agreed that ala carte' services allow you to hone in on the channels you actually watch vs paying for a bunch of channels you don't. There is a reason that all the major cable and Sat companies are offering their own version of an ala carte' streaming service. I am surprised no one has developed a truly ala carte' service. I mean one that you can pick from a list of all channels and pay per channel instead of one price for their own pre-packaged bundles.

Sadly though I do agree, as streaming starts to eclipse cable and sat subscriptions, it makes sense that prices will climb.
2023 FR Sunseeker 2400B MBS

austinjenna
Explorer
Explorer
I would guess that most folks are like me and have had internet a long time before going to streaming. Even with DTV I had internet so no I don't pay that internet cost for streaming.


Agreed. Most already have internet so it does not come into play.

2010 F350 CC Lariat 4x4 Short Bed
2011 Crusader 298BDS 5th Wheel
Reese 16K

fj12ryder
Explorer II
Explorer II
T18skyguy wrote:
I have OTA with Roku streaming Sling, Netflix, Amazon prime. Sure, the cost may be approaching cable, but at least I'm paying for what I want to see instead of silly cable bundles with home shopping, food channel etc. I'm a news addict, so I need that on demand and am willing to pay for it.
You mean that everything on those channels/boxes you mentioned is worth watching? I really find that kind of hard to believe. So you're still paying for content you don't want/watch.

The thing that really irritates me about cable is that I have to pay a surcharge for sports' channels. I HATE professional sports/advertising, but I cannot opt out of that surcharge. Stupid.
Howard and Peggy

"Don't Panic"

lane_hog
Explorer II
Explorer II
Yep. Unbundling hasn't been successful with satellite due to the (no pun intended) overhead costs, but for streaming services it's a lot more practical. My guess is that I'll be able to eventually have a way to pick out only the 10 or so channels we watch and dispense with the rest...
  • 2019 Grand Design 29TBS (had a Winnebago and 3x Jayco owner)
  • 2016 F-150 3.5L MaxTow (had Ram 2500 CTD, Dodge Durango)
  • 130W solar and 2005 Honda EU2000i twins that just won't quit

T18skyguy
Explorer
Explorer
I have OTA with Roku streaming Sling, Netflix, Amazon prime. Sure, the cost may be approaching cable, but at least I'm paying for what I want to see instead of silly cable bundles with home shopping, food channel etc. I'm a news addict, so I need that on demand and am willing to pay for it.
Retired Anesthetist. LTP. Pilot with mechanic/inspection ratings. Between rigs right now.. Wife and daughter. Four cats which we must obey.

Beaker
Explorer
Explorer

From what I can tell, most "cord cutters" seem to totally ignore the mere fact of the cost of the Internet service that YOU directly pay for when adding up their savings.

You NEED to add that cost in to make a good comparison of services and IF you will really see any savings.. Something else to consider, Internet providers will also increase rates to cover new faster technology so don't expect your Internet cost to stay low as streaming traffic causes more congestion


I would guess that most folks are like me and have had internet a long time before going to streaming. Even with DTV I had internet so no I don't pay that internet cost for streaming.
2008 Silverado 2500HD Duramax
2010 Cruiser 26RK

Gdetrailer
Explorer III
Explorer III
wowens79 wrote:
The biggest cost for TV providers is content. This is catching up with the streaming services. They are all currently operating at a loss to gain subscribers. Once they start trying to make a profit you will see their prices come in line with cable and satellite services.

I work in the cable industry, and see the prices charged by the different channels. The margins are very small.

The streamers can be a little cheaper since they don't actually get the service to your house, they rely on your internet provider to do that. Probably 80-90% of your internet traffic is streaming video. So add $30-40 of Internet cost to that $61 for Hulu, and it gets you close the the price of cable/satellite.

So when you streamers/cable/sat prices go up, it's not just because they want more money, it's because Discovery/ABC/ESPN/HGTV etc want more money. They want more money because NFL, actors, producers, etc want more money.




Cord cutter and Internet streaming folks NEED to reread and listen to wowens79 posted..

From what I can tell, most "cord cutters" seem to totally ignore the mere fact of the cost of the Internet service that YOU directly pay for when adding up their savings.

You NEED to add that cost in to make a good comparison of services and IF you will really see any savings.. Something else to consider, Internet providers will also increase rates to cover new faster technology so don't expect your Internet cost to stay low as streaming traffic causes more congestion..

Additionally, while you MIGHT save a little right now by subscribing to ONE streaming service, what happens down the road when some of the programing you want is on a DIFFERENT streaming service??

Not all programing on Sat service is available on ALL/every streaming service so the end result is you WILL end up paying for more than one streaming service IF you want to get all of what the Sat service offers. That can get extremely expensive in a hurry if you subscribe to more than ONE streaming service.

Additionally traditionally when a "service" goes away, ALL of the remaining services automatically increase their pricing.. Competition results in lowered pricing, less competition and the result is increased pricing..

time2roll
Explorer II
Explorer II
I subscribe to none of it. Very little to watch anyway.
DW seems to switch providers every three months and makes a sport about getting the best deal.

wowens79
Explorer III
Explorer III
The biggest cost for TV providers is content. This is catching up with the streaming services. They are all currently operating at a loss to gain subscribers. Once they start trying to make a profit you will see their prices come in line with cable and satellite services.

I work in the cable industry, and see the prices charged by the different channels. The margins are very small.

The streamers can be a little cheaper since they don't actually get the service to your house, they rely on your internet provider to do that. Probably 80-90% of your internet traffic is streaming video. So add $30-40 of Internet cost to that $61 for Hulu, and it gets you close the the price of cable/satellite.

So when you streamers/cable/sat prices go up, it's not just because they want more money, it's because Discovery/ABC/ESPN/HGTV etc want more money. They want more money because NFL, actors, producers, etc want more money.
2022 Ford F-350 7.3l
2002 Chevy Silverado 1500HD 6.0l 268k miles (retired)
2016 Heritage Glen 29BH
2003 Flagstaff 228D Pop Up

lane_hog
Explorer II
Explorer II
Lwiddis wrote:
Hulu is in trouble IMO


Not really. Disney controls them as of May 2019, and will own them outright by 2024.
  • 2019 Grand Design 29TBS (had a Winnebago and 3x Jayco owner)
  • 2016 F-150 3.5L MaxTow (had Ram 2500 CTD, Dodge Durango)
  • 130W solar and 2005 Honda EU2000i twins that just won't quit