---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@...> wrote :
On 09/25/2014 10:42 PM, ultrarishi wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@...> mailto:noozguru@... wrote : Dan, Hulu's business model is different form Netflix. Netflix does not show ads and people expect this with their Hulu+ subscription. You get no ads on Hulu+ with movies and they have the Criterion Collection. The problem with TV shows is sometimes the studio will place them for "buy" at sites like Amazon, iTunes and VUDU. These are the ad free versions. So there would be a problem (i.e. conflict of interest) if the shows were ad free on Hulu+ too. The main thing Hulu needs to do is keep with short ad breaks or ones no longer than 1 minutes. The current model is 6 ad breaks per 44 minute show (they actually call them 6 act shows). The broadcast versions can have up to 4 minutes of commercials on a break. I've heard that some networks losing OTA viewers are trying to make up for lost revenue by shoving more ads on streaming. That won't work as people will drop the subscriptions. And millennials who don't like to watch TV shows at all just like to watch clips on places like Hulu. The worlds is changing right out from under the feet of the network execs. Because of the ads + cost, I don't think I will ever pick up Hulu again. In fact, I am now having a hard time with network television shows because the ads are just so irritating. I much rather use my VPN and download shows like Manhattan, The Good Wife, The Blacklist, etc. via torrent than to watch live or dvr with the ads in place. Too many ads and so annoying. I have a problem with "network television" period since most of the shows are insipid. Most of any series viewing is not broadcast shows and I tend to favor foreign shows made in less commercialistic environments. One of the great things about the Utopia BD was the featurette on shooting the controversial episode three because it covered the constraints of shooting with a limited budget. US networks make shows that are mostly gloss with little content. That gloss costs money so no wonder they have to sell a lot of ads to balance the spreadsheet. And then no one watches. We're all waiting to see what new shows get canceled first. Maybe less gloss, more story might please viewers but I'm sure the research the networks do tells them gloss is the key. But then why did FOX redo BBC's "Broadchurch" especially after most of us have seen the original on BBC America? More story? Network TV execs seem like a bunch of baboons flailing away in their cages. And yes, I have been enjoying "Manhattan" especially because I grew up near the Hanford Project and know the weirdness surrounding it. I actually prefer movies over series because they are easier to fit into my schedule. If a series falls into the soap opera cliche then I am likely to drop it because I don't like to be "strung along". And contrary to popular belief I'm actually not a TV junkie either. And then the ads. I turn the sound off on Hulu+ which makes ads more insipid. US businesses are desperate (just look at the layoffs and doors closing) but hard sells aren't going to help and in fact probably make us NOT want to buy the product. I think the business caste deserves where they are in the Indian caste system. ;-) Watched "Network" on Sundance Channel last night. Yours is a good Synopsis. Coming up on Showtime in October is "Homeland". One of my previous favs was "Mad Men". keep it up, i love the personalized reviews! P.S. Business, in North America, is our caste system. I also find that more and more of my listening and viewing is taken up with podcast that scratch a certain itch. Narrowcasting as opposed to broadcasting is capturing my interest.
