So the price for those three is equvelant to 3/4 of my cable price which includes those and many other channels. I assume the streaming options give you back catalogues as well as other advantages such as the option to wire content wherever / whenever, and I also realize that streaming is the future, but pricing is a real issue. One of the reasons for cutting the chord was to get away from, 'bundling', but it looks like bunbling is here to stay. I hope Apple will be successful and get the ball rolling.
The streaming option really doesn't have an advantage over cable/satellite. With a current subscription to cable/satellite you can already access the streaming apps so you do have access to back catalogs. You can watch shows on the go as well logging in with your cable/satellite credentials. Personally, I don't think there will ever be an advantage to streaming options unless they do a la carte. What would get me to ditch DirecTV is an a la carte option to where you could pick say 20 channels from a list for a certain price per month.
And meanwhile many others will continue to cut the cord and pay $10 per month for Netflix. Apple doesn't need to offer everything but they need to offer some kind of streaming service, and soon. It's the price that people find attractive about NF. And their original content keeps growing. Is it possible for Apple to acquire HBO?
I'm curious, what's the urgency for Apple to offer a Netflix like service? Apple isn't on the ropes and continues to suck up all the hardware profit in computing and mobile. Why is a streaming service the answer to their problems? And what is the problem again?
There is a limited number of movies/shows that you can watch in a month. The most cost effective way is to rotate between the services. I.e. HBO then Showtime, Stars, HBO, etc.
It will cost you a bit over $10 / month...
Apple should set up this rotation for you. I would piss off the Studios, but who cares. They are getting paid for their content.
That's a way Apple can add value and differentiate.
You're confusing studios and premium cable channels. The cable channels either produce their own content or license it from the studios. Apple either has to make a deal with the channels, who still don't want to piss off the MSO's (cable companies) where most of their income still derives from or license the movies and TV shows directly from the studios like the other streaming services do, although in many cases, the cable channel has an exclusive. But that's changing as well. Netflix, for one, is moving more and more towards original content and they've apparently notified the movie studios that they'll be licensing far fewer titles.
Rotating between those services every month is fine if you only watch movies, but it doesn't work if you watch series, unless you wait until a series is over and then binge once you're in the month where you have the desired service. I won't watch movies on HBO anyway, because they crop widescreen movies to fit a 16:9 screen. Ugh!
For all the talk about cord cutting, most cable companies bundle the ISP service with cable. And if you drop cable, they raise the price of the ISP service by $10 to $30 a month, making the incremental cost of cable usually not more than $30-$40 (not including all the phony fees) even in the big cities where cable is very expensive. Most people will want to subscribe to at least 3-4 cable channels or streaming services or pay the equivalent in watching individual shows. Once you do that, you're usually paying just as much if not much more as one paid before for cable or satellite, although you can fool yourself into thinking you're a cord cutter.
I'd love to cut the cord since there's little I watch on cable, but there's still enough that I don't want to give it up completely. And using all these separate streaming services is steps backwards in terms of ease-of-use, even aside from the image quality issues.
So I don't think anyone, including Apple, has solved the problem as yet and I don't think anyone is likely to until/unless the cable networks or the MSO's start collapsing. It's always amazed me that 150 basic cable channels can all draw advertising. In my particular case, I've "deprogrammed" all but about 30.
And meanwhile many others will continue to cut the cord and pay $10 per month for Netflix. Apple doesn't need to offer everything but they need to offer some kind of streaming service, and soon. It's the price that people find attractive about NF. And their original content keeps growing. Is it possible for Apple to acquire HBO?
How does one watch live news and sports on Netflix?
There is a limited number of movies/shows that you can watch in a month. The most cost effective way is to rotate between the services. I.e. HBO then Showtime, Stars, HBO, etc.
It will cost you a bit over $10 / month...
Apple should set up this rotation for you. I would piss off the Studios, but who cares. They are getting paid for their content.
That's a way Apple can add value and differentiate.
For all the talk about cord cutting, most cable companies bundle the ISP service with cable. And if you drop cable, they raise the price of the ISP service by $10 to $30 a month, making the incremental cost of cable usually not more than $30-$40 (not including all the phony fees) even in the big cities where cable is very expensive. Most people will want to subscribe to at least 3-4 cable channels or streaming services or pay the equivalent in watching individual shows. Once you do that, you're usually paying just as much if not much more as one paid before for cable or satellite, although you can fool yourself into thinking you're a cord cutter.
I don't have to fool myself, I know it's cheaper. Friends and family pay $125+ for their cable bundles. I pay for ISP only, say $50. Yes I pay for Netflix but so do those with cable so we can ignore that. I buy the additional shows I want to see from itunes, but these are rare and don't make up the difference in monthly savings. Add in that I cut it 15+ years ago and it's been a great deal. Also dropped telephone service at the same time, had a cell which my job often pays for.
There is a limited number of movies/shows that you can watch in a month. The most cost effective way is to rotate between the services. I.e. HBO then Showtime, Stars, HBO, etc.
It will cost you a bit over $10 / month...
Apple should set up this rotation for you. I would piss off the Studios, but who cares. They are getting paid for their content.
That's a way Apple can add value and differentiate.
For all the talk about cord cutting, most cable companies bundle the ISP service with cable. And if you drop cable, they raise the price of the ISP service by $10 to $30 a month, making the incremental cost of cable usually not more than $30-$40 (not including all the phony fees) even in the big cities where cable is very expensive. Most people will want to subscribe to at least 3-4 cable channels or streaming services or pay the equivalent in watching individual shows. Once you do that, you're usually paying just as much if not much more as one paid before for cable or satellite, although you can fool yourself into thinking you're a cord cutter.
I don't have to fool myself, I know it's cheaper. Friends and family pay $125+ for their cable bundles. I may for ISP only, say $50. Yes I pay for Netflix but so do those with cable so we can ignore that. I buy the additional shows I want to see from itunes, but these are rare and don't make up the difference in monthly savings. Add in that I cut it 15+ years ago and it's been a great deal. Also dropped telephone service at the same time, had a cell which my job often pays for.
Therein lies an interesting point: the pricing of these services vary dramatically, and the phony fees are added to make it next to impossible to shop. It becomes tedious to try to find what you want, and make a value judgment.
My personal approach is that anything with a recurring fee is suspect. If I know I will use it (like my cable modem) then fine; I'll shop that specifically, and decide if the cost is reasonable with respect to how I value it. All these bundles and packages are next to impossible to sort out. Again, YMMV if you consume a lot of content. I rather don't. People rave about Netflicks, but I can't even justify their $10 thingy.
I like my OTA service. If Apple put a couple of OTA tuners into ATV (like SilconDust) with a coax port on the back, they'd really have something I'd value.
In the end, I really value free. Free is a good price.
There is a limited number of movies/shows that you can watch in a month. The most cost effective way is to rotate between the services. I.e. HBO then Showtime, Stars, HBO, etc.
It will cost you a bit over $10 / month...
Apple should set up this rotation for you. I would piss off the Studios, but who cares. They are getting paid for their content.
That's a way Apple can add value and differentiate.
For all the talk about cord cutting, most cable companies bundle the ISP service with cable. And if you drop cable, they raise the price of the ISP service by $10 to $30 a month, making the incremental cost of cable usually not more than $30-$40 (not including all the phony fees) even in the big cities where cable is very expensive. Most people will want to subscribe to at least 3-4 cable channels or streaming services or pay the equivalent in watching individual shows. Once you do that, you're usually paying just as much if not much more as one paid before for cable or satellite, although you can fool yourself into thinking you're a cord cutter.
I don't have to fool myself, I know it's cheaper. Friends and family pay $125+ for their cable bundles. I may for ISP only, say $50. Yes I pay for Netflix but so do those with cable so we can ignore that. I buy the additional shows I want to see from itunes, but these are rare and don't make up the difference in monthly savings. Add in that I cut it 15+ years ago and it's been a great deal. Also dropped telephone service at the same time, had a cell which my job often pays for.
[...]
In the end, I really value free. Free is a good price.
I find the material things I enjoy most in life are not provided by other people for free, they usually require an exchange in order to produce the thing of value. Free food? You can keep it. Free music? I probably don't like it. Free apps and services? Probably not really free. Etc. I don't mind paying for something of value.
There is either more to such a plan, or it is simply an out-there rumour. Hard to see what value Apple brings here. All are services that are available on ATV/iOS, and with TV App support for all services it would provide all the value possible to end user. USA only, and looks like a limited market (cord cutters who are willing to pay high $$ for 3 premium channels). Discounting seems limited...so why would Apple bother?
No doubt Apple is focused on something completely different...perhaps with original content.
One item I raised on another thread (but it was last post), is around a subscription model for iTunes content. This an area where Apple
is still dominant is in content purchases & rentals for Movies and TV. This service
hasn't changed much in years. We expect
that is mostly the studio's doing, but obviously don't know all the
details. This service is little more
than the digital version of Blockbuster and Best Buy. What are some "reasonable" ideas to
reboot the service, with clear differentiation from either the skinny linear
bundle or back-catalog/own content service (Netflix & HBO)?
- Make it have an element of subscription. Example: for $10/month, you get one free
movie rental per month + discounts on each rental. Say discounted rentals for movies are $1.99 -
$3.99 (vs. $4.99-$5.99).
- Extend the rental period to at least 3 days (72 hours).
- Develop a rental service for series that do not include
the "current season". Make the
catchup on series much easier and economical.
People are far more likely to rent than buy, and if brings them up to
speed, perhaps more likely to increase viewership of current season shows. Rental for each show would be the 72 hours
(not the series:)
- Provide discounts for purchases (e.g. 20% discount on
purchase while a subscriber).
This encourages more consumption of content, each
transaction still brings in revenue, there is a subscription base to build on. It is hard to see how it wouldn't generate
more money for both sides. It builds on
Apple's iTunes catalog strength, improves the user experience, and brings
unique value to Apple TV and iOS devices.
There is a limited number of movies/shows that you can watch in a month. The most cost effective way is to rotate between the services. I.e. HBO then Showtime, Stars, HBO, etc.
It will cost you a bit over $10 / month...
Apple should set up this rotation for you. I would piss off the Studios, but who cares. They are getting paid for their content.
That's a way Apple can add value and differentiate.
For all the talk about cord cutting, most cable companies bundle the ISP service with cable. And if you drop cable, they raise the price of the ISP service by $10 to $30 a month, making the incremental cost of cable usually not more than $30-$40 (not including all the phony fees) even in the big cities where cable is very expensive. Most people will want to subscribe to at least 3-4 cable channels or streaming services or pay the equivalent in watching individual shows. Once you do that, you're usually paying just as much if not much more as one paid before for cable or satellite, although you can fool yourself into thinking you're a cord cutter.
I don't have to fool myself, I know it's cheaper. Friends and family pay $125+ for their cable bundles. I may for ISP only, say $50. Yes I pay for Netflix but so do those with cable so we can ignore that. I buy the additional shows I want to see from itunes, but these are rare and don't make up the difference in monthly savings. Add in that I cut it 15+ years ago and it's been a great deal. Also dropped telephone service at the same time, had a cell which my job often pays for.
[...]
In the end, I really value free. Free is a good price.
I find the material things I enjoy most in life are not provided by other people for free, they usually require an exchange in order to produce the thing of value. Free food? You can keep it. Free music? I probably don't like it. Free apps and services? Probably not really free. Etc. I don't mind paying for something of value.
I don't either. But then, TV shows and movies aren't something I particularly value.
In the end, all this is about personal value judgments. I'm not above a BOGO at the supermarket, or a free sample at the liquor store. I use coupons. I like the radio in my car, and while yes, I had to buy the radio and listen to the ads, it streams plenty of free music that I do find fit for my purpose. YMMV.
There is a limited number of movies/shows that you can watch in a month. The most cost effective way is to rotate between the services. I.e. HBO then Showtime, Stars, HBO, etc.
It will cost you a bit over $10 / month...
Apple should set up this rotation for you. I would piss off the Studios, but who cares. They are getting paid for their content.
That's a way Apple can add value and differentiate.
For all the talk about cord cutting, most cable companies bundle the ISP service with cable. And if you drop cable, they raise the price of the ISP service by $10 to $30 a month, making the incremental cost of cable usually not more than $30-$40 (not including all the phony fees) even in the big cities where cable is very expensive. Most people will want to subscribe to at least 3-4 cable channels or streaming services or pay the equivalent in watching individual shows. Once you do that, you're usually paying just as much if not much more as one paid before for cable or satellite, although you can fool yourself into thinking you're a cord cutter.
I don't have to fool myself, I know it's cheaper. Friends and family pay $125+ for their cable bundles. I may for ISP only, say $50. Yes I pay for Netflix but so do those with cable so we can ignore that. I buy the additional shows I want to see from itunes, but these are rare and don't make up the difference in monthly savings. Add in that I cut it 15+ years ago and it's been a great deal. Also dropped telephone service at the same time, had a cell which my job often pays for.
[...]
In the end, I really value free. Free is a good price.
I find the material things I enjoy most in life are not provided by other people for free, they usually require an exchange in order to produce the thing of value. Free food? You can keep it. Free music? I probably don't like it. Free apps and services? Probably not really free. Etc. I don't mind paying for something of value.
The things I value most couldn't be purchased for any amount of money. Paying for things does not intrinsically make them more valuable. Something to remember.
Does Apple really need some type of streaming service, or Skinny bundle? Why would I as a cord cutter want to start giving Apple Money every month? For what, the same old thing everyone else has or will be doing.
Unless it's a-la-cart, why waste time. Say let the channels pick whatever price they want to sell their channel at. Maybe some will be 50 cents, others $1. Maybe some even free like the HSN. If a channel wants to change $5, let them. Maybe ESPN $15. You price yourself to high and less people will sign up. make it cheap and a lot more people will get your channel and so you'll have more viewers, which will be watching your commercials anyway where you're really making your money. That and product placement. Maybe some type of bundle discount. A discount subscribing to 5 channels. A little larger discount getting 10 channels and so on.
The point being you get exactly the channels you want. No one else is doing it either. Makes it completely different from what everyone else is doing. If Apple can't do that, I see no reason for Apple to waste it's time to be like everyone else. Bundling HBO, Showtime and Stars is nothing new. If you subscribe to DirectTVNow, you can get HBO for $5 a month for example. Apple really has to do something different that matters to people.
We were pretty early "cord-cutters." We got rid of cable 10 or more years ago. Got rid of the phone company too. (Vonage, then Ooma, now just cell) Early on we just bought DVDs and then got Netflix and Amazon Prime, and sometimes things like Drama Fever. Lots of foreign shows on Youtube (we watch Korean, Japanese, and Russian shows mostly). I don't know about most people, but I'll be kind of surprised if these "channel" bundles are really what people want.
I would like to watch Chopped and Cutthroat Kitchen but I don't really want the Food Network. There's something I want to watch on the History channel but I don't care about the rest. I'd like to just pick what I want to watch and watch that. I don't care about any channels. Shouldn't the best experience be just watching what you want? Why should I care about a channel?
Maybe Apple should apply their Apple Music model to TV.
We were pretty early "cord-cutters." We got rid of cable 10 or more years ago. Got rid of the phone company too. (Vonage, then Ooma, now just cell) Early on we just bought DVDs and then got Netflix and Amazon Prime, and sometimes things like Drama Fever. Lots of foreign shows on Youtube (we watch Korean, Japanese, and Russian shows mostly). I don't know about most people, but I'll be kind of surprised if these "channel" bundles are really what people want.
I would like to watch Chopped and Cutthroat Kitchen but I don't really want the Food Network. There's something I want to watch on the History channel but I don't care about the rest. I'd like to just pick what I want to watch and watch that. I don't care about any channels. Shouldn't the best experience be just watching what you want? Why should I care about a channel?
Maybe Apple should apply their Apple Music model to TV.
That makes no sense to me at all. Care to elaborate? Do you mean watch anything in their iTunes Movie and TV catalog for $15/mo?
There is a limited number of movies/shows that you can watch in a month. The most cost effective way is to rotate between the services. I.e. HBO then Showtime, Stars, HBO, etc.
It will cost you a bit over $10 / month...
Apple should set up this rotation for you. I would piss off the Studios, but who cares. They are getting paid for their content.
That's a way Apple can add value and differentiate.
For all the talk about cord cutting, most cable companies bundle the ISP service with cable. And if you drop cable, they raise the price of the ISP service by $10 to $30 a month, making the incremental cost of cable usually not more than $30-$40 (not including all the phony fees) even in the big cities where cable is very expensive. Most people will want to subscribe to at least 3-4 cable channels or streaming services or pay the equivalent in watching individual shows. Once you do that, you're usually paying just as much if not much more as one paid before for cable or satellite, although you can fool yourself into thinking you're a cord cutter.
I don't have to fool myself, I know it's cheaper. Friends and family pay $125+ for their cable bundles. I may for ISP only, say $50. Yes I pay for Netflix but so do those with cable so we can ignore that. I buy the additional shows I want to see from itunes, but these are rare and don't make up the difference in monthly savings. Add in that I cut it 15+ years ago and it's been a great deal. Also dropped telephone service at the same time, had a cell which my job often pays for.
[...]
In the end, I really value free. Free is a good price.
I find the material things I enjoy most in life are not provided by other people for free, they usually require an exchange in order to produce the thing of value. Free food? You can keep it. Free music? I probably don't like it. Free apps and services? Probably not really free. Etc. I don't mind paying for something of value.
The things I value most couldn't be purchased for any amount of money. Paying for things does not intrinsically make them more valuable. Something to remember.
Note that I said the material things I enjoy. What material things that you value most can't be purchased? If you're not referring to products or services that other people provide (e.g., your kid's hand-made christmas tree decorations etc), it's not relevant to this discussion.
"minor upgrades like 4k support" are you kidding? The lack of 4k support is what makes the Apple TV irrelevant. Roku is already on it's second generation 4k device and if Apple comes to the 4K market without HDR forget about Cupertino's future in the set top world.
Not interested. I've bought every single Apple TV that has come out only to be burned by what was promised and didn't deliver. Shitty games. Learn from Nintendo.
Apple doesn't make games.
they should and they let us down with the inclusion of the A8 chip but can't blame Apple for what developers do.
Apple's deal with them should compensate the various content providers based on the number of MINUTES their content is viewed by any given AppleTV subscriber. Differences in the QUALITY of content (e.g., HBO vs. re-runs of old movies vs. live sports) should be priced differently, but per-minute consumption charges constitute the only fair pricing scheme.
The networks and other content providers are paid by advertisers on this basis: viewership numbers multiplied by a rate that varies form one show to the next. Advertisers do not pay as much to content providers whose shows are not popular.
They don't pay a fee to the content provider for its content "library," if that library doesn't get watched. Yet, that's how HBO charges for service. And that is why Netflix is producing its own content -- and why Apple will, too. They will compete away a lot of HBO and Showtime's viewers because of their improperly priced content.
Comments
Rotating between those services every month is fine if you only watch movies, but it doesn't work if you watch series, unless you wait until a series is over and then binge once you're in the month where you have the desired service. I won't watch movies on HBO anyway, because they crop widescreen movies to fit a 16:9 screen. Ugh!
For all the talk about cord cutting, most cable companies bundle the ISP service with cable. And if you drop cable, they raise the price of the ISP service by $10 to $30 a month, making the incremental cost of cable usually not more than $30-$40 (not including all the phony fees) even in the big cities where cable is very expensive. Most people will want to subscribe to at least 3-4 cable channels or streaming services or pay the equivalent in watching individual shows. Once you do that, you're usually paying just as much if not much more as one paid before for cable or satellite, although you can fool yourself into thinking you're a cord cutter.
I'd love to cut the cord since there's little I watch on cable, but there's still enough that I don't want to give it up completely. And using all these separate streaming services is steps backwards in terms of ease-of-use, even aside from the image quality issues.
So I don't think anyone, including Apple, has solved the problem as yet and I don't think anyone is likely to until/unless the cable networks or the MSO's start collapsing. It's always amazed me that 150 basic cable channels can all draw advertising. In my particular case, I've "deprogrammed" all but about 30.
Over the air in my city.
My personal approach is that anything with a recurring fee is suspect. If I know I will use it (like my cable modem) then fine; I'll shop that specifically, and decide if the cost is reasonable with respect to how I value it. All these bundles and packages are next to impossible to sort out. Again, YMMV if you consume a lot of content. I rather don't. People rave about Netflicks, but I can't even justify their $10 thingy.
I like my OTA service. If Apple put a couple of OTA tuners into ATV (like SilconDust) with a coax port on the back, they'd really have something I'd value.
In the end, I really value free. Free is a good price.
No doubt Apple is focused on something completely different...perhaps with original content.
One item I raised on another thread (but it was last post), is around a subscription model for iTunes content. This an area where Apple is still dominant is in content purchases & rentals for Movies and TV. This service hasn't changed much in years. We expect that is mostly the studio's doing, but obviously don't know all the details. This service is little more than the digital version of Blockbuster and Best Buy. What are some "reasonable" ideas to reboot the service, with clear differentiation from either the skinny linear bundle or back-catalog/own content service (Netflix & HBO)?
- Make it have an element of subscription. Example: for $10/month, you get one free movie rental per month + discounts on each rental. Say discounted rentals for movies are $1.99 - $3.99 (vs. $4.99-$5.99).
- Extend the rental period to at least 3 days (72 hours).
- Develop a rental service for series that do not include the "current season". Make the catchup on series much easier and economical. People are far more likely to rent than buy, and if brings them up to speed, perhaps more likely to increase viewership of current season shows. Rental for each show would be the 72 hours (not the series:)
- Provide discounts for purchases (e.g. 20% discount on purchase while a subscriber).
This encourages more consumption of content, each transaction still brings in revenue, there is a subscription base to build on. It is hard to see how it wouldn't generate more money for both sides. It builds on Apple's iTunes catalog strength, improves the user experience, and brings unique value to Apple TV and iOS devices.
Thoughts?
In the end, all this is about personal value judgments. I'm not above a BOGO at the supermarket, or a free sample at the liquor store. I use coupons. I like the radio in my car, and while yes, I had to buy the radio and listen to the ads, it streams plenty of free music that I do find fit for my purpose. YMMV.
they should and they let us down with the inclusion of the A8 chip but can't blame Apple for what developers do.
The networks and other content providers are paid by advertisers on this basis: viewership numbers multiplied by a rate that varies form one show to the next. Advertisers do not pay as much to content providers whose shows are not popular.
They don't pay a fee to the content provider for its content "library," if that library doesn't get watched. Yet, that's how HBO charges for service. And that is why Netflix is producing its own content -- and why Apple will, too. They will compete away a lot of HBO and Showtime's viewers because of their improperly priced content.