Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bernardom 4770 days ago
No, no, no. That's not what I meant, sorry if it wasn't clear.

The point isn't that they're buying Hulu for its original programming. It's that if they want to become a major player in the original content space, they'll need a huge user base to start with. For that, they need licensed content.

In other words, my thesis is that TV networks can be disrupted by someone else making original content and distributing it over the web, but the disruptor will need a big number of users to make this possible. It's much easier to get that big user base with licensed content.

Whether it makes sense for Yahoo to be in the studio and production business is another question!

2 comments

But this is only buying an extremely limited license to content. Its a catch 22 the only reason Hulu has had any success is because its had premium content provided by its current owners. If Hulu goes independent the content rights are likely not getting renewed at their current rates.

Note that there were rumors that Google already made an overture to buy Hulu at a price rumored to be 2x the current price but with much longer licensing terms and were turned down.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/google-dish-made-highe...

Unless Yahoo wants to focus more on original programming for Hulu (a strategy I'm behind) then buying it for its current content rights is a fools bet.

Netflix seems to be doing better at this model. But I'd agree the more competition as we can have in the space, the better.