Hulu price increases TWICE this year!

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.

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.

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).

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.

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.