Comments on: Hulu’s Pitch: We’ll Pay You More Than Anyone (Online)

By: Who Thrives On Live? | Josh Braun's Blog

Who Thrives On Live? | Josh Braun's Blog — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:17:55 +0000

[...] there is a complicated dance going on between Netflix and the television companies, and even between Hulu and the television companies who own it—to say nothing of what’s been happening with video platforms like Boxee or [...]

By: Can Hulu Hang On to Its Online TV Audience?: Online Video News «

Can Hulu Hang On to Its Online TV Audience?: Online Video News « — Tue, 08 Feb 2011 22:00:59 +0000

[...] Hulu’s pitch to broadcasters is that it helps drive more monetization per episode than most other platforms, including DVR and cable. In a long blog post defending the company’s business model, CEO Jason Kilar said Hulu’s averaged $0.143 in ad revenue per episode in 2010, better than broadcast DVR ($0.097), cable ($0.106) and cable DVR ($0.048). While not quite as high as the monetization for broadcast TV, which averages $0.216 per half-hour episode, Hulu’s fourth quarter monetization rose to $0.185 per episode by comparison. [...]

By: Web Video Weekly: Netflix and Hulu Under Attack, Revision 3 Riding High, Web Series Try New Forms | TELEVISUAL

Fri, 04 Feb 2011 21:01:17 +0000

[...] Hulu Gets Back Viacom’s Daily Show, Jersey Shore (New York Times): Meanwhile, the site is defending its ad rates, saying it pays more than all outlets except live broadcast (maybe it’s those action ads!) [...]

By: TimeKeeper

TimeKeeper — Fri, 04 Feb 2011 19:42:57 +0000

Ryan – Precisely. It was brilliant on both their parts. $25m is exactly what it was worth at the time and Netflix proved it by paying the fee. Lucky for Starz, that asset has grown in value. Lucky for Netflix, so has their service.

By: Ryan Lawler

Ryan Lawler — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 22:44:37 +0000

TimeKeeper – For as small as that Starz deal looks now, it’s worth mentioning that there wasn’t a market for the Starz Play service when Netflix did the deal. I think that Verizon had also signed up for Starz Play, but no other MVPDs were willing to pay for it. From that perspective, $20m-$30m a year doesn’t seem like a bad deal, considering no one else wanted it.

By: Three Takes on the Kilar Essay | Josh Braun's Blog

Three Takes on the Kilar Essay | Josh Braun's Blog — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 22:00:26 +0000

[...] Jason Kilar wants to avoid licensing content on the same terms as Netflix // Ryan Lawler at NewTeeVee suggests that Kilar’s post, which makes a numbers case for continuing to license network content on a per user-per month basis, is the CEO’s pitch to content providers not to stick the company with the sort of expensive licensing agreements to which Netflix is increasingly being subjected. This entry was posted in Journalism, New Media & Digital Culture and tagged digital television, hulu, jason kilar. Bookmark the permalink. ← “Integrating two software systems is usually more like performing a heart transplant than snapping together LEGO blocks. It can be done—if there’s a close enough match and the people doing it have enough skill—but the pieces don’t fit together trivially. And failure may not be immediately obvious; it may take a while to see signs of rejection.” blog comments powered by Disqus /* [...]

By: Rob

Rob — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 18:27:53 +0000

@TimeKeeper

Well said.

Also,

“Netflix and Hulu are not really that special. They have a good head start but anyone else with enough capital and marketing can knock them off the top.”

I think you’re implying Amazon Prime, which would be an 800 pound gorilla in this space overnight.

By: TimeKeeper

TimeKeeper — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 18:16:07 +0000

It was Starz’s forward thinking and risk taking that started Netflix in the streaming business. They asked for about $10k/title and got the ball rolling. ($10k/title sounds like a lot but it is very aggressive.) If they asked for 10x more, like the other studio’s did, we’d still be getting all of these shows from the PirateBay and no one would be making any money on digital.

With risk comes reward. That library is worth a lot and with their amazing foresight, or just dumb luck, the market size exploded and the value of their library increased as well. One other note, the value of their partner, Netflix, also increased over that time making it able to pay more for the library had they not done the deal in the first place.

Netflix and Hulu are not really that special. They have a good head start but anyone else with enough capital and marketing can knock them off the top. There is nothing key or proprietary that will keep competition away.

Content is king and the content rights holders are calling the shots. Some with vision, like Starz, will take some risk and get rewarded for it. Others like to knock the online model as they are not playing in the digital space and see it as a challenge to their distribution value chain.

With the shareholders HULU has, it should have been a slam dunk from day one. $500M in ad revenues this year is nothing for a company with this pedigree and opportunities given to it. It shows that you need forward thinking partners that have a long term vision of where the market is going to be and play an active roll in getting there. Not partners who wish to control and limit the company to make sure it does not surpass their entrenched value chain.

By: Michael Long

Michael Long — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 17:28:20 +0000

“But other content providers are now griping publicly about how much Netflix pays for content, and the overwhelming feeling in Hollywood is that the checks it writes in the future will have to increase massively to support its fast-growing streaming service.”

Then they’re idiots. Netflix doesn’t HAVE enough money to keep writing blank checks for their overvalued content. While the content has value, they forget that the Netflix service has value, and customers are paying for that as well.

Tell you what. How about making your content — all of your content — available, and then Netflix paying you if and only if someone actually watches an old episode of Columbo or Hill Street Blues?