Euro iPhone carrier; iTunes video service; McCartney on iTunes

[AppleInsider]

Vodafone may not be the only European wireless carrier under consideration for Apple's iPhone contract in Europe. Meanwhile, a prominent market research firm says video services like iTunes are just a "temporary flash" along the way to better alternatives. And it's official -- one Beatle is on his way to iTunes.

T-Mobile's iPhone play

Germany-based T-Mobile may become the iPhone's official carrier for Europe, according to those close to the negotiations. Although it had been suggested that Vodafone would win -- an implication the carrier publically denied -- MarketingWeek reported last week that its rival at T-Mobile is favored as the sole outlet for iPhone sales in the continent.

Other Europe-wide providers such as O2 and Orange were said to have been in the running but unsuccessful in reaching the later stages of contract discssions. Terms of a possible deal weren't discussed but may be different than the multi-year exclusivity agreement Apple has signed with AT&T in the US.

"It would be in Apple's best interests to get more than one operator to distribute the phone because the European market is more fragmented than the US," one analyst told the publication.

T-Mobile does not operate in as many countries as Vodafone, and would be locked out of key European countries such as France, Italy, and Spain.

iTunes video service a dead-end?

Online video sites that sell shows and movies such as Apple Inc.'s iTunes will likely peak this year as more programming is made available on free outlets supported by advertising, claims the latest study from Forrester Research.

According to the firm, sales of movies and television shows are expected to almost triple to $279 million in 2007 from an estimated $98 million last year. But unless the average consumer begins paying for their online video en masse, growth in sales will likely peter out next year.

"In the video space, iTunes is just a temporary flash while consumers wait for better ways to get video. They're already coming," said Forrester Research analyst James McQuivey, the author of the study, who also called the paid download video market a "dead end."

The firm estimated that sales growth is not likely to triple or even double in 2008 and beyond, after early adopters and media addicts have already started using the services.

iTunes lands a Beatle

Meanwhile, Macworld UK notes that EMI has confirmed plans to release the entire Paul McCartney solo catalogue through online music services for the first time (as first reported last week by Ars).

EMI Music has retained the former Beatles' solo catalogue and is preparing a comprehensive re-launch, including new digital campaigns as well as physical re-releases.

"Paul McCartney’s post-Beatles catalogue, spanning four decades, is one of the great treasures of popular music," said Tony Wadsworth, chairman and CEO, EMI Music UK. "EMI is proud to be introducing Paul’s music to the digital marketplace."

The catalogue includes Paul’s first solo album ‘McCartney’ through his releases with Wings to his latest critically-acclaimed studio album ‘Chaos And Creation In The Backyard’.

Singles to be released digitally will include: ‘Band On The Run’, ‘My Love’, ‘Let ‘Em In’, and ‘Jet’.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[aaarrrgggh]

Interesting point on the video download. I think the current price structure is a dead end for sure, but I don't think iTunes will be irrelevant.

Ultimately, people are sick of the commercials, and don't seem to want to watch TV in front of their computer. Fewer, better targeted ads might make ad-supported media work either for free or at a better price point. It does seem clear that no site is going to have exclusivity for video (learning from music's mistakes).

What is really needed is a more logical rental model. Not sure how it would be structured-- limited life and limited plays are both a pain to deal with. Also, bandwidth costs will add up in a way that Music doesn't suffer from-- the download sites need a higher margin.

Time will tell, but I hope Apple does something innovative in this arena soon!

[studiomusic]

Don't forget Live And Let Die!

[ascii]

I would prefer to pay a few bucks and not have to watch ads. But people on a budget may prefer ads. I think there's room for both models in the market.

[andrewcod]

Digg it

[Marsattack]

"Arhg! T-Mobile doesn't operate in Denmark!!!" -runs out the balkany and jumps out, landing 50 feets under on the road..."splat"

[Robin Hood]

In Ireland, the main mobile operators are:

Vodafone (1.8 Mbps HSDPA, being upgraded to 3.6 Mbps at the moment)
O2 (3.6 Mbps HSDPA network already operational, with broadband services launching shortly, and will be upgraded to 14.4 Mbps within 12 months)
Meteor (G3 rollout to begin soon, recently won license)
Hutchison 3G (3) (3.6 Mbps network, upgrading to 7.2 and 14.4 Mbps this year)
DigiWeb (not yet operational, will be launching 4G mobile network @ 870 MHz by December, speeds of up to 100 Mbps expected with near-100% geographic coverage)

All except Meteor operate a 3G network. The other networks operate a dual network: GSM/GPRS/EDGE + 3G/UMTS/HSDPA.

No 3G iPhone, no sale.

[jwdawso]

T-Mobile does not operate in as many countries as Vodafone, and would be locked out of key European countries such as France, Italy, and Spain.

So Apple is going to release the iPhone in Europe but not sell it in France, Italy, Spain, .... That doesn't make any sense, so there must be something wrong here.

[GQB]

Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh

What is really needed is a more logical rental model. Not sure how it would be structured-- limited life and limited plays are both a pain to deal with.

Um, without either limited play or limited life, wouldn't that be called 'a sale'?

[jwdawso]

Originally Posted by Robin Hood

In Ireland, the main mobile operators are:

Vodafone (1.8 Mbps HSDPA, being upgraded to 3.6 Mbps at the moment)
O2 (3.6 Mbps HSDPA network already operational, with broadband services launching shortly, and will be upgraded to 14.4 Mbps within 12 months)
Meteor (G3 rollout to begin soon, recently won license)
Hutchison 3G (3) (3.6 Mbps network, upgrading to 7.2 and 14.4 Mbps this year)
DigiWeb (not yet operational, will be launching 4G mobile network @ 870 MHz by December, speeds of up to 100 Mbps expected with near-100% geographic coverage)

All except Meteor operate a 3G network. The other networks operate a dual network: GSM/GPRS/EDGE + 3G/UMTS/HSDPA.

No 3G iPhone, no sale.

Is anybody else bored with the incessant comments about 3G?

[Robin Hood]

Originally Posted by jwdawso

Is anybody else bored with the incessant comments about 3G?

Well, it is boring to wait for web sites to download on your iPhone.

As far as providers, Apple has to pick 2 in Europe. For example, they could go with T-Mobile exclusively in countries where T-Mobile has a network, but than choose Vodafone or O2 as a secondary in other countries like Ireland, where T-Mobile does not have a network, but Vodafone and O2 both do.

They won't be able to go with just one operator like they did with Cingular (oops, I mean AT&T Mobility) in the USA.

For now, I am more than happy with my Nokia E61i. It does everything I want, has a QWERTY keyboard and a decent screen, as well as a web browser based on WebKit/Safari that renders most pages beautifully.

[aegisdesign]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

"It would be in Apple's best interests to get more than one operator to distribute the phone because the European market is more fragmented than the US," one analyst told the publication.

Wow! An analyst who actually knows what they're talking about.

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

T-Mobile does not operate in as many countries as Vodafone, and would be locked out of key European countries such as France, Italy, and Spain.

Which is why Apple would be stupid to go with one carrier for the whole of Europe and why American talk of who the single carrier is is misguided. This isn't America. Single carrier lock-in just doesn't happen here.

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

According to the firm, sales of movies and television shows are expected to almost triple to $279 million in 2007 from an estimated $98 million last year. But unless the average consumer begins paying for their online video en masse, growth in sales will likely peter out next year.

"In the video space, iTunes is just a temporary flash while consumers wait for better ways to get video. They're already coming," said Forrester Research analyst James McQuivey, the author of the study, who also called the paid download video market a "dead end."

In Europe most of our TV download services are completely FREE so it could actually be Apple's biggest market if they could only get a DRM scheme out there to the European TV companies that they can use. So far they haven't, and the TV companies have used Windows Media.

Paid downloads are already DEAD in Europe before Apple even got started here.

Originally Posted by studiomusic

Don't forget Live And Let Die!

That was the Beatles, not just Macca.

Originally Posted by jwdawso

So Apple is going to release the iPhone in Europe but not sell it in France, Italy, Spain, .... That doesn't make any sense, so there must be something wrong here.

Most US commentators are presuming there will be ONE carrier, which isn't the way things are done in Europe. Then again, Apple in Europe can be completely clueless at times so if Apple US say one carrier, they'll stupidly follow.

[Marsattack]

Originally Posted by GQB

Um, without either limited play or limited life, wouldn't that be called 'a sale'?

Subscription based "rental"/offer could be an alternative...just a thought.

[JeffDM]

Don't the other video services require an internet connection? As such, I don't expect that iTunes will be completely irrelevant. If Apple shipped them with ads for free and allowed them onto iPods and notebooks without constant internet connections, then I think that would basically deny oxygen to other services. To be honest, I wait to buy DVD instead, but still, that 6+ month gap is a big window of opportunity. I do get the occasional episode when the EyeTV f*#ks up on me.

[draizor]

I really don't care about 3G; the only thing I want is for Apple to have a carrier in France. They can't reasonably dismiss the market for an iPhone in those european countries since it's already pretty popular there; or at least heard of and expected. I'm really not that worried, I don't think we'll be left behind.

[Wil Maneker]

RE: Video Downloads

I think the error in the Forrestor logic is the assumption that Paid Video Downloads are used to replace re-runs.

Paid Video Downloads are a replacement for the purchase of DVDs.

Five years down the road, I am not going to want to rewatch Lost with commercials. Also you are at the mercy of the distributor. What if ABC decides that only certain episodes of Lost will be available, at any given time, for download.

The ad-funded programming that Forrestor is talking about sounds like Re-Run 2.0, while the Paid Video Download market is more like DVD 2.0.

Apologies for lame "2.0" references.

[quinney]

Originally Posted by aegisdesign

That was the Beatles, not just Macca.

Wasn't it McCartney and Wings?

[TBaggins]

Originally Posted by Robin Hood

In Ireland, the main mobile operators are:

Vodafone (1.8 Mbps HSDPA, being upgraded to 3.6 Mbps at the moment)
O2 (3.6 Mbps HSDPA network already operational, with broadband services launching shortly, and will be upgraded to 14.4 Mbps within 12 months)
Meteor (G3 rollout to begin soon, recently won license)
Hutchison 3G (3) (3.6 Mbps network, upgrading to 7.2 and 14.4 Mbps this year)
DigiWeb (not yet operational, will be launching 4G mobile network @ 870 MHz by December, speeds of up to 100 Mbps expected with near-100% geographic coverage)

All except Meteor operate a 3G network. The other networks operate a dual network: GSM/GPRS/EDGE + 3G/UMTS/HSDPA.

No 3G iPhone, no sale.

It wouldn't be surprising at all if the Euro version of the iPhone were 3G.

In America, Apple went with 2.5G largely because its carrier partner (ATT/Cingular) had much better coverage with their 2.5G data network as opposed to their 3G network, but Europe and European carriers are a different story.

.

[Porchland]

Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh

Interesting point on the video download. I think the current price structure is a dead end for sure, but I don't think iTunes will be irrelevant.

Ultimately, people are sick of the commercials, and don't seem to want to watch TV in front of their computer. Fewer, better targeted ads might make ad-supported media work either for free or at a better price point. It does seem clear that no site is going to have exclusivity for video (learning from music's mistakes).

What is really needed is a more logical rental model. Not sure how it would be structured-- limited life and limited plays are both a pain to deal with. Also, bandwidth costs will add up in a way that Music doesn't suffer from-- the download sites need a higher margin.

Time will tell, but I hope Apple does something innovative in this arena soon!

A subscription model would put Apple in a position to compete directly with cable and satellite. Otherwise, Apple TV will just be a solid, quality fringe player that a relatively small number of people use to replace or supplement cable and satellite. Not the iPod of video content.

Even with a content subscription, though, I'm not sure Apple offers the value it would have to offer to be a mass product. If Apple had contracts with every current TV show, PPV from all of the movie studios, sports, news and other live content, it's still just a facsimile of cable, and you have to pay $300 for the box.

The one two areas I could see Apple TV having an edge over cable is breadth of content and HD. Then instead of replacing just cable, it replaces cable AND Netflix -- and with tons of HD content. Even then, $300 is still a lot to bite off.

I don't think I will buy an Apple TV until it has a critical mass of HD content, a large catalog of PPV current and catalog movies, a significant amount of HD content, and either a $100 box or a free (or cheap) box with a one-year contract.

By that time, won't Comcast be there too?

[rods5]

aegisdesign wrote:

"That was the Beatles, not just Macca."

aegisdesign: Sorry, it wasn't The Beatles, it was:

"LIVE AND LET DIE"
(title song)
Composed by Paul McCartney and Linda McCartney
Performed by Paul McCartney and Wings

http://imdb.com/title/tt0070328/soundtrack

The Beatles broke up in 1969, Live and Let Die came out in 1973.

[vinney57]

"Band On The Run"!!!! On iTunes!!! OMG I can hardly wait!!!

Euro iPhone will likely be a 3G. Carve up between Vodafone and T-Mobile. All perfectly fine and logical and nothing to get anybody's knickers in a twist.

[jeffhrsn]

Originally Posted by quinney

Wasn't it McCartney and Wings?

Yes, it was.

[tb1970]

T-Mobile is in an alliance of several European mobile telecommunications operators.

And the countrys that is a part of it are: Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom.

Read more at this URL:

http://www.freemovealliance.com/index.php?lang=en

[json]

>> T-Mobile is in an alliance of several European mobile telecommunications operators.

If they could get all those companies in on the iPhone for Europe it would be awesome! Great coverage all over Europe and, and this is from a purely egotistical standpoint, outstanding coverage in Sweden with Telia.

Oh well, one can only hope!

[JupiterOne]

So does that mean that these companies will also make changes to their networks to support Visual Voicemail?

[melgross]

Originally Posted by aegisdesign

In Europe most of our TV download services are completely FREE so it could actually be Apple's biggest market if they could only get a DRM scheme out there to the European TV companies that they can use. So far they haven't, and the TV companies have used Windows Media.

Paid downloads are already DEAD in Europe before Apple even got started here.

What am I missing here Aegis?

You are saying that most European TV downloads are free, but then you say it could be Apple's biggest market. How so?

Are you saying they could license Quicktime, and take MS's market, even thought the downloads would be free?

[SpinDrift]

I would not buy an iPhone if T-Mobile are the carrier. They are shockingly bad and their customer service is appauling. I thought Vodafone are bad enough, but T-Mobile? No!!!

Come on Apple.. don't you think Orange would be a better choice? Think of all the Apples and Oranges jokes!

[Joe_the_dragon]

How will apple get around the EU cell phone laws that force all phones to be unlocked?

[melgross]

I think this is great!

As with our American users, no one agrees on which carrier is good, or bad.

It seems as though it makes no difference who Apple goes with, there will always be people who hate that carrier, and have a carrier that they say Apple MUST use, which almost everyone else hates as well.

[tundraboy]

Okay, okay let me get this straight.

Free ad-supported TV shows are already available on TV. Despite that, paid ad-free TV downloads still managed to generate some significant revenue.
But. When free ad-supported TV shows become downloadable on your computer (instead of just on your TV), the paid ad-free TV show downloads will shrivel up and die.
Because the people who paid for ad-free shows to avoid watching ads will now be willing to watch ads if they were downloaded from the web?

I will repeat my mantra on analysts: Ifthese guys are so smart, why don't they just keep your analysis to yourselves and make gazillions of money on the stock market instead? They're like Pluto (the Disney pooch), nobody can explain why they should logically exist and yet, there they are.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by tundraboy

Okay, okay let me get this straight.

Free ad-supported TV shows are already available on TV. Despite that, paid ad-free TV downloads still managed to generate some significant revenue.
But. When free ad-supported TV shows become downloadable on your computer (instead of just on your TV), the paid ad-free TV show downloads will shrivel up and die.
Because the people who paid for ad-free shows to avoid watching ads will now be willing to watch ads if they were downloaded from the web?

I will repeat my mantra on analysts: Ifthese guys are so smart, why don't they just keep your analysis to yourselves and make gazillions of money on the stock market instead? They're like Pluto (the Disney pooch), nobody can explain why they should logically exist and yet, there they are.

When they talk about paid ad supported downloads, they generally are talking about paid for ads, but the program is free to the consumer.

Many TV srations already do this. Just watch TV. They will tell you to go to their website to view the program again, or to catch a missed show. It's ad supported, and free to you.

How do you think these analysts work? Do you think they stay at home guessing as you do, and just write a few paragraphs here and there?

It takes a large support network for them to get the information they need. Often they have contacts around the world, and have to visit many of them in the factories themselves, etc. They also have other contacts in business. There is a lot of actual analysis done on the numbers they come up with. They just present a bit of the headline conclusions to the public in order to generate interest and publicity for their companies.

Almost all of this is a result of them working for a company that does this work, charging anywhere from hundreds to thousands for each report.

An analyst can't do this on their own. But, they do get paid very well, The best, most well known, are pulling several hundred thou a year.

And these guys are right more often than they are wrong, though they can't get it exact.

We can guess, and sometimes we get it right as well, but we are only guessing, and when we are wrong, we don't go around telling everyone.

They have to back up what they are saying with numbers, which we don't have to do.

And when we do, guess what?

We use their numbers to support our guesses.

[aegisdesign]

Originally Posted by melgross

What am I missing here Aegis?

You are saying that most European TV downloads are free, but then you say it could be Apple's biggest market. How so?

Yes. For instance, http://www.channel4.com/4od/ gives you free downloads for a week after airing. The BBC's iPlayer is going to be the same when it's out of beta. Both are Windows Media only because Fairplay doesn't do self destructing time based downloads. British Telecom's BTVision service offers the same free downloads and paid downloads from 29p although you do have to have their broadband service.

Apple's AppleTV looks silly by comparison. It's a nice box but completely unconnected to any service just now.

Originally Posted by melgross

Are you saying they could license Quicktime, and take MS's market, even thought the downloads would be free?

Yes. That's what they need to do to provide a cross platform service for the TV companies otherwise they'll all be Windows Media and nobody will be buying shows from iTunes. The analyst is spot on - iTunes is currently a dead end as is AppleTV. They need to change both AppleTV and Quicktime/Fairplay.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by aegisdesign

Yes. For instance, http://www.channel4.com/4od/ gives you free downloads for a week after airing. The BBC's iPlayer is going to be the same when it's out of beta. Both are Windows Media only because Fairplay doesn't do self destructing time based downloads. British Telecom's BTVision service offers the same free downloads and paid downloads from 29p although you do have to have their broadband service.

Apple's AppleTV looks silly by comparison. It's a nice box but completely unconnected to any service just now.




Yes. That's what they need to do to provide a cross platform service for the TV companies otherwise they'll all be Windows Media and nobody will be buying shows from iTunes. The analyst is spot on - iTunes is currently a dead end as is AppleTV. They need to change both AppleTV and Quicktime/Fairplay.

Interesting.

[donlphi]

I think the Apple TV has done a great job of bringing content back to the living room. It has also reminded me why I like watching things on my TELEVISION rather than my computer (even lower quality video).

Even if NBC, ABC, CBS, and FOX offer their content to be downloaded for free (with commercials), they don't have a DEVICE that allows you to watch them on your television. Right now, you have to watch your content on your computer, which TECHNICALLY could be hooked up to your living room display, but most people are not going to go through the hassle. Often times the episodes are broken apart, requiring you to search the website for the other half. Not my idea of a relaxing evening watching my favorite shows.

The other word I only "grazed" was COMMERCIALS, but after having my comcast DVR for a while now, I almost never watch commercials. Adding it to a free content is not going to make it "worth" it. I actually wish I could pay a monthly fee to get rid of my commercials on comcast. This is a reason box sets of TV shows sell so well. I think that trend will continue and even sell better once you can get entire seasons ON DEMAND (ala Sopranos on HBO On-Demand). Many people don't have time to sit and watch the shows on a given night of the week. I know I watch the show Entourage a couple days after the show aires originally (not REALLY sure what night that is to be honest), but it is always there waiting when I'm ready.

Anyway...

I'm pretty sure video content will sell, I would like to see a rental option available soon (a per movie rental fee rather than a subscription).

[aegisdesign]

Originally Posted by melgross

It seems as though it makes no difference who Apple goes with, there will always be people who hate that carrier, and have a carrier that they say Apple MUST use, which almost everyone else hates as well.

Yep. The problem is, all carriers are bad. It's just a matter of which carrier you've had the most bad experiences with recently that will throw your vote.

However, just looking at tariffs, T-Mobile is the ONLY carrier with a sensible data plan here in Europe. Vodafone and Orange may have slightly better coverage but they're astronomically expensive for data. I'm on both Vodafone AND Orange on two of my phones. I only keep Vodafone around to keep the number (it's my incoming business line) on a pay-as-you-go SIM card I pay about £10 a year for. I wouldn't use them otherwise.

Orange have the advantage of having two lines on one phone. Nobody else does this. That's why I've got Orange.

However, I'll be on t-mobile next for data alone.

[orebun]

Originally Posted by Robin Hood

Well, it is boring to wait for web sites to download on your iPhone.

As far as providers, Apple has to pick 2 in Europe. For example, they could go with T-Mobile exclusively in countries where T-Mobile has a network, but than choose Vodafone or O2 as a secondary in other countries like Ireland, where T-Mobile does not have a network, but Vodafone and O2 both do.

... which would be really great for switzerland where there's none of those three...

they should just sell it open (it does have a SIM card slot) like everybody does in europe. since it's going to be the same price with or without a plan it wouldn't make any difference for the consumer.

oh yeah, except i could buy it in fall 2007 (not like the itunes store which took two years to arrive here (not that i would buy my music there))

[caliminius]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

iTunes lands a Beatle

Meanwhile, Macworld UK notes that EMI has confirmed plans to release the entire Paul McCartney solo catalogue through online music services for the first time (as first reported last week by Ars).

EMI Music has retained the former Beatles' solo catalogue and is preparing a comprehensive re-launch, including new digital campaigns as well as physical re-releases.

"Paul McCartney’s post-Beatles catalogue, spanning four decades, is one of the great treasures of popular music," said Tony Wadsworth, chairman and CEO, EMI Music UK. "EMI is proud to be introducing Paul’s music to the digital marketplace."

The catalogue includes Paul’s first solo album ‘McCartney’ through his releases with Wings to his latest critically-acclaimed studio album ‘Chaos And Creation In The Backyard’.

Singles to be released digitally will include: ‘Band On The Run’, ‘My Love’, ‘Let ‘Em In’, and ‘Jet’.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

I'm a Beatles fan myself, but I don't get the continuing excitement about the possibility of the Beatles on iTunes (or any other digital music store). I feel like the arrival of the Beatles downloads is expected to bring about the death of the CD, like the headlines will suddenly read, "Circuit City, Best Buy End CD Sales." With quotes from store management like, "With the Beatles on iTunes, CD sales have fallen through the floor. When I asked a customer why he wasn't buing CD's, he replied, 'The Beatles, Man! They're on iTunes! Why would I want to enjoy the quality sound of those remastered CDs when I can download a crappy sounding copy from iTunes.'"

The Beatles were a great band but the arrival of the digital downloads aren't going to change the sales dynamics currently in place.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by Wil Maneker

Apologies for lame "2.0" references.

Thanks for acknowledging that "2.0" is lame. It's tacked-on to so much stuff to try to pretend it's new when it often is just a repackaging or even just a renaming of something that's been done before.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by aegisdesign

Yes. For instance, http://www.channel4.com/4od/ gives you free downloads for a week after airing. The BBC's iPlayer is going to be the same when it's out of beta. Both are Windows Media only because Fairplay doesn't do self destructing time based downloads.

I imagine that Fairplay can be modified to do self-destructing if it's not already there as a hidden and unused feature. That's beside the point if Apple doesn't license it.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by melgross

I think this is great!

As with our American users, no one agrees on which carrier is good, or bad.

It seems as though it makes no difference who Apple goes with, there will always be people who hate that carrier, and have a carrier that they say Apple MUST use, which almost everyone else hates as well.

I'm pretty sure that everybody sucks on nearly equal levels, but differ on why they suck.