Chuck_IV wrote:

Until the next generation of suits take the helm, from the current living in the past suits, this "resistence" will continue. They can fight progress, but they cannot stop it. You would think they would have learned this from prior fights and even looking at the music industry.

Streaming IS the future. One of these days, a light bulb will go on and realize that there is a LOT of money to be made here and that streaming will give them more control over how the content is viewed than they ever had with traditional TV.

If you blink, that light bulb might be CFL or LED, Time moves fast in TV years.

It's all data distribution. The old models are based on data being difficult and expensive to distribute. Internet distribution is cheap and easy. People want to watch video on their TV, not on their computers, but they don't care how the data got there.

With the new technology we have, it's getting much easier for people to produce quality content of their own. The limitation is the skill and creativity of the talent involved. You don't want people standing around being wooden. Could people produce their own Firefly-like content? I think they could. Chad Vader: Day Shift Manager is quite good. You wouldn't be able to have Hollywood-level special effects, so you would have to settle for good story and good acting.

I don't think the real revolution will come from Joe Average deciding he can make his own content. That gets you Ed Wood or worse. It's going to come from small studios who want to bypass networks and cable/satellite providers.

mkiker2089 wrote:

devil.punchbowl wrote:

Networks will be networks. Hulu won't be going very far. They will naturally want to restrict too much. As that is how networks work. It's big buzz now, but folks will spend more money and learn the hard way.

That's the thing though. Networks can't be "networks" anymore. They are literally going bankrupt trying to maintain the status quo. There is just too much competition to ignore. The ones you hear complaining about Hulu aren't the networks, it's the providers. Sure DirecTv hates Hulu. Even though it's OTA content it's still another source, that DirecTv doesn't control. The pillar crashing down is an obsolete system. Hulu is a new support beam for the networks.

Hulu, like I said above, gives ad revenue back to the network. Revenue they have already lost to competition, piracy, and lost consumer interest.

You are absolutely correct, this is incremental revenue for the networks. The issue is this model scares the flower out of the service providers. They see their business model crumbling just like the old telcos. The cat is out of the bag and there is no putting it back. It may be Hulu or some other provider but Internet on demand television is here to stay.

FX4 wrote:

You are absolutely correct, this is incremental revenue for the networks. The issue is this model scares the flower out of the service providers. They see their business model crumbling just like the old telcos. The cat is out of the bag and there is no putting it back. It may be Hulu or some other provider but Internet on demand television is here to stay.

I think comcast knows this as well. They are a huge provider but they aren't like the telephone companies. They have already broadened their market with internet, cable, and internet based DVR service similar to Hulu. I don't think they'll want Hulu gone like someone surmised. I see them embracing it. I wonder if they'll make it free to Comcast customers but charge the rest of us a service fee? Would Newscorp/Fox and Disney/ABC allow that?