5 ms·
If I was running Hulu, I would do the exact same thing. A user costs Hulu 'x' amount of dollars in terms of bandwidth and Hulu makes 'y' dollars off that user
by knightinblue 17y ago
If I was running Hulu, I would do the exact same thing.
A user costs Hulu 'x' amount of dollars in terms of bandwidth and Hulu makes 'y' dollars off that user via ads. In the US, x < y.
In developing countries, x > y. Two reasons - one, they're eating up more bandwidth ('x' goes up) and two, they're much harder to monetize ('y' goes down).
It's hard enough to monetize viewers from the US. Compared to them, it's practically impossible to monetize viewers from other countries. As a for-profit company, Hulu is doing the right thing. Otherwise, they'd be bleeding all over the place like youtube.
- cellis 17y agoWhat?! Things Shouldn't be 100% Free And Open?? You really don't get it. Edit: it should be painfully obvious that this is sarcasm
- mikedouglas 17y agoI'm sure most of us are talking about Canada, Europe and Australia, but thanks for referring to us all as "developing countries".
- knightinblue 17y agoI was talking specifically about countries like India where users consume a lot of bandwidth, thereby resulting in a double whammy (it's not just the 'y' that goes down, 'x' also goes up) I guess I should have been clearer in the distinction. My bad.
- bodhi 17y agoI'm sure you didn't mean to imply that everywhere outside the US is a 'developing country' :)
- knightinblue 17y agolol of course not. I was talking specifically about countries like India where users consume a lot of bandwidth. I guess I should have been clearer in the distinction. My bad.