Hulu launches $12 'ad-free' streaming tier to fend off Netflix, other rivals
Hulu on Wednesday added a $12 "No Commercials" tier to its steaming video service, looking to better compete with rivals like Netflix and HBO Now, which have always been ad-free.
The existing zero-cost and $8 tiers will remain available, Hulu said. Both of those include advertising, but a paid subscription is needed to watch some content, or any video at all on mobile devices and set-top boxes.
The No Commercials option is not fully ad-free, however. Seven TV shows have been deemed "exceptions," according to Re/code, namely New Girl, Scandal, How to Get Away With Murder, Grey's Anatomy, Once Upon a Time, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., and Grimm.
These will have 15-second ads before they begin, followed by 30-second spots at the end. Unlike the free and $8 tiers, there will be no mid-show interruptions.
Rumors of an ad-free tier first emerged in July. The company was reportedly interested in a balance between attracting people used to ad-free video and keeping ad revenue flowing.
The announcement comes on the eve of a Sept. 9 Apple press event during which Apple is expected to reveal a radically redesigned Apple TV. A key feature may be Roku-like universal search, allowing people to locate content across multiple services and choose the one they want to go with.
The existing zero-cost and $8 tiers will remain available, Hulu said. Both of those include advertising, but a paid subscription is needed to watch some content, or any video at all on mobile devices and set-top boxes.
The No Commercials option is not fully ad-free, however. Seven TV shows have been deemed "exceptions," according to Re/code, namely New Girl, Scandal, How to Get Away With Murder, Grey's Anatomy, Once Upon a Time, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., and Grimm.
These will have 15-second ads before they begin, followed by 30-second spots at the end. Unlike the free and $8 tiers, there will be no mid-show interruptions.
Rumors of an ad-free tier first emerged in July. The company was reportedly interested in a balance between attracting people used to ad-free video and keeping ad revenue flowing.
The announcement comes on the eve of a Sept. 9 Apple press event during which Apple is expected to reveal a radically redesigned Apple TV. A key feature may be Roku-like universal search, allowing people to locate content across multiple services and choose the one they want to go with.
Comments
Clap, Clap, Clap.
I love non-ad content.
I'm sure there are millions around the world that are willing to pay a bit more to get no ads.
Hulu
Netflix
HBO (not 100% ad free but close)
AppleMusic
iOS Ad blockers
We need more services that cut ads. Ads are the bane of society. Hate them with a passion. I work too hard to waste my valuable time looking at piss poor ads. I'll pay big $ not to see that crap. Hope the whole ad industry tanks. Chief on this list is Google. Scum of the earth.
Funny you should bring this up. Yesterday’s podcast of MacBreak Weekly discussed this very thing. Advertisers are quite up in arms over iOS 9 and OS X 10.11 having new ad blocking technology. Websites that depend on advertising for their income could block access unless you agree to ads. Many popular and useful websites could simply vanish. Leo LaPorte said he originally founded Twit to be ad free and asked for donations instead. Didn’t happen. Basically people don’t want to see ads but they don’t want to pay either. Tightwads. Another possibility is micro payments where you don’t pay a subscription but you do pay say 5¢ for every article you access.
Bottom line is you can’t have it both ways. You can’t blocks ads and still expect the website to stay in business. You don’t want to pay for your content but you somehow expect the website to run on thin air anyway. If you get rid of ads then expect the diversity and content of the Internet to diminish. There are only so many subscriptions people will be willing to pay for every month. Let the market decide you say? Then only the big sites will be left.
How much per month would you pay for access to AppleInsider, iMore, MacWorld, 9to5 Mac, MacRumors, and all the other excellent Apple centric websites that have been around for a long time because of ads? Block the ads, goodbye website unless you pay.
Clap, Clap, Clap.
I love non-ad content.
I'm sure there are millions around the world that are willing to pay a bit more to get no ads.
Hulu
Netflix
HBO (not 100% ad free but close)
AppleMusic
iOS Ad blockers
We need more services that cut ads. Ads are the bane of society. Hate them with a passion. I work too hard to waste my valuable time looking at piss poor ads. I'll pay big $ not to see that crap. Hope the whole ad industry tanks. Chief on this list is Google. Scum of the earth.
No ads=No more Google.
Not a bad thing mind you.
I do not dislike ads, I dislike obtrusive, obnoxious ads. Advertising is a vital component of capitalism. And I enjoy ads when they are done well or when they show me a product I like that I wouldn't have known about. HOWEVER...advertising has become an addiction to industries struggling to adapt to the digital economy. Many ads are annoying and for products I wouldn't buy anyway. Back in the day, before Google was so evil, I recall them saying they weren't threatened by the presence of ad blockers on Chrome, and were not going to prevent them. The quote was something along the lines of "If users find ads annoying and block them, it is our job to make them less annoying." Hulu is a great example of annoying ads. I pay for their service, but rarely use it because the ads are as bad as network TV. Will an ad-free tier change things? I doubt it. They're already going back on their own claim and I suspect before long it will be "reduced advertising" not ad-free.
Woohoo! WELL worth the extra $4 per month. Heading off to switch plans IMMEDIATELY...
You didn't read the entire FAQ. Hulu is doing the same thing others are doing and charging extra when going through iTunes to offset Apple's charge. I really would rather have Apple handle all transactions than have to individually pay for each channel (talking about Hulu on AppleTV) through a separate website. This opens up the possibility of having my credit card information stolen every time I have to enter it on a new website.
"The No Commercials plan costs $11.99/month, with the option to add the SHOWTIME Premium Add-on for an additional $8.99/month. If you sign up on an iOS device (iPads and iPhones) and pay for your Hulu subscription with your iTunes account, there is an additional charge due to transaction costs associated with Apple. The cost of the No Commercials plan when you sign up on an iOS device is $13.99/month."
I hope that with the addition of this new Hulu+ tier, they do not INCREASE the number or length of interruptions on their basic service to try to force people to the higher tiered plan...but something tells me that is exactly what they will do...
All these leads to is more and more content and service providers that are sub-par. Without ads these crap business would go bankrupt. And they should since they offer crap but only stay afloat because of ads.
If the content is crap that no one wants to watch, why do advertisers even bother placing ads on that station?
Yes! Pay more for the same terrible content.
They force packages on the consumer that contain channels the consumer doesn't watch and will never use
The packages seem like a nuisance but without them there would be almost no foreign language channels or local community programs. Those can only exist in a package by the large top tier programs paying their freight. The diversity of programming would suffer if everything went ala carte, plus it would probably end up being even more expensive if you have 20 or so different subscriptions.
I don't expect something for nothing and I realize the majority of my Hulu subscription cost goes towards paying for content delivery and Hulu salaries and does not pay for all of the content that Hulu provides - especially the current season content that is not available on NetFlix. So I am more than willing to sit through a few brief commercial interruptions in lieu of a much higher monthly subscription. The cable industry is completely unreasonable though. There are far too many interruptions - each interruption is far too long - and they increase the volume of the commercials to a level that is obnoxious. They force packages on the consumer that contain channels the consumer doesn't watch and will never use and there is no differentiation between consumers who watch TV for 2 hours per month and those whose watch for 4000 hours per month. I find Hulu an extremely good service - even with the ads. It provides a great deal of value to me and has let me get rid of the cable company for over 3 years now.
I hope that with the addition of this new Hulu+ tier, they do not INCREASE the number or length of interruptions on their basic service to try to force people to the higher tiered plan...but something tells me that is exactly what they will do...
You're spot on when talking about the cable TV industry. I cut the cord 3 years ago and never looked back. Netflix+Hulu+Plex is plenty for me, because here's the real irony. After cutting the cord, I started doing other things. I took up boxing for a while, I built a really awesome Plex server, I made a few websites...I've spent my time DOING things. However, I do still enjoy a lazy day from time to time, and I'm right there with you on Hulu. If they up the ads on the $8/month tier, maybe I'll just drop them for HBO Now. Or maybe they won't get replaced, because life outside of TV is way more interesting anyway.
I think there are only about 40 decent channels on TV. The rest are crap.
The cable companies buy the programming at wholesale and package it to maximize their profit by up selling to the consumer. That is why the movie channels are in one package and the sports in another. That way the consumer has to buy the top level subscription. If they would let you subscribe to just the channels you wanted, the price would be much higher. The cable company isn't going to charge you less. Most people are still going to be paying $100 a month or more because each of those 40 channels you want would end up being $5-10+ per month ala carte.
I take it that you never watched Luther.
Educational or public service channels may be in those niche markets too. It doesn't mean they don't serve a very valuable service for a smallish viewership segment but I don't see them surviving in an a la carte marketplace.
While of course these channels are going to come "on the internet", without a connection all you'll get is over-the-air via antenna and HBO and The Golf Channel ain't coming outta your antenna.