or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Amazon offers purchases of Fox and ABC shows for 99 cents
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Amazon offers purchases of Fox and ABC shows for 99 cents

post #1 of 84
Thread Starter 
Amazon challenged Apple by announcing 99-cent video purchases the same day Apple announced rentals.

Bridget Carey of The Miami Herald noticed Wednesday that Amazon's new Video on Demand offerings were being marketed as "to own," as opposed to Apple's new rental model.

The Seattle, Wa.-based online retailer is offering shows from ABC, FOX, and BBC, including "Glee," "Bones," and "Lost." The Amazon Video on Demand streaming service is compatible with Mac or PC and various set-top boxes, but videos can only be downloaded to a Windows PC and "cannot be transferred to iPods."

The timing of Amazon's new releases coincides with Apple's September 1 media event, where the company updated its iPod touch, nano and shuffle lines and revealed a new cloud-centric Apple TV.

The new Apple TV streams media instead of storing it, switching from downloaded to rented content. During the event, Apple announced a partnership with Fox and ABC to offer 99-cent rentals of TV shows through iTunes. Rentals must be watched within a 30-day period and expire 48-hours after the first viewing.

Recent reports claimed Amazon was working on a subscription video service, but gave no indication of Amazon's plan to offer TV shows "to own" for the same price as Apple's rentals.
post #2 of 84
What did the 5 fingers say to the face?

SLAP!

The studios/networks are Rick James.
Apple is Charlie Murphy.
post #3 of 84
Big deal. If Amazon got that option, so would iTunes. That makes the @TV even more attractive (you would simply download it on your computer - which us what you would do with Amazon - and use AirPlay). We'll find out soon enough.

Just makes us all better off.

The larger point here is the complete lack of creativity and innovation by competitors: Why can't/don't a single one create a box, an interface and software - i.e., the whole package - that does it better than Apple? Hello!? It's pretty sad, really.......
post #4 of 84
I am surprised that Apple seemed to have such a "hard time" with this, and Amazon throws it out there like it was no effort at all... And how is Amazon able to do purchases for .99 and Apple can't? Is it because iTunes can be used on iDevices? Why is that such a problem for these studios/networks????
post #5 of 84
Oh dear. I can't imagine Steve Jobs will be too pleased to hear that Disney and News Corp gave Amazon a better offer on their tv-shows. \

I think Rupert Murdoch and Bob Iger can expect a telephone call from 1 Infinite Loop real soon!
post #6 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Amazon challenged Apple by announcing 99-cent video purchases the same day Apple announced rentals. ...

I don't understand how it's legal for the networks to do this. By deciding they are going to give Amazon this or Apple that, they are deciding the fate of those companies to a large extent (or trying to). This is like selling cars but charging fat people more than thin ones or giving a better deal to a certain race or ethnic group.

Basic fairness says that if they offer a product at a certain price to one company that all other things being equal, they should offer the same deal to another.
post #7 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I don't understand how it's legal for the networks to do this. By deciding they are going to give Amazon this or Apple that, they are deciding the fate of those companies to a large extent (or trying to). This is like selling cars but charging fat people more than thin ones or giving a better deal to a certain race or ethnic group.

Basic fairness says that if they offer a product at a certain price to one company that all other things being equal, they should offer the same deal to another.

Unfortunately we do not know the terms of either deal. It may be that "all other things" are not equal. Who knows.
post #8 of 84
Windows only and no transfers to iOS devices? Doesn't matter how good the prices are at least I won't be getting it. I'm still happy with the rentals. I don't watch shows multiple times so it's a pretty good deal for me.
post #9 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Big deal. If Amazon got that option, so would iTunes. That makes the @TV even more attractive (you would simply download it on your computer - which us what you would do with Amazon - and use AirPlay). We'll find out soon enough.

Just makes us all better off.

The larger point here is the complete lack of creativity and innovation by competitors: Why can't/don't a single one create a box, an interface and software - i.e., the whole package - that does it better than Apple? Hello!? It's pretty sad, really.......

I don't understand what you are trying to say. Right now it looks like iTunes = .99 cents for rental, and Amazon .99 cents to own. How does that make @TV a more attractive alternative.
post #10 of 84
I wonder if Amazon's contract was written in such a way that there is a loophole in which they can do this arbitrarily - i.e. Amazon takes the loss. Like what they did with the $9.99 pricing of ebooks.

I've never used the Amazon Video On Demand service, so is it really "to own"?
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #11 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I don't understand how it's legal for the networks to do this. By deciding they are going to give Amazon this or Apple that, they are deciding the fate of those companies to a large extent (or trying to). This is like selling cars but charging fat people more than thin ones or giving a better deal to a certain race or ethnic group.

Basic fairness says that if they offer a product at a certain price to one company that all other things being equal, they should offer the same deal to another.

You guys are mistaken in how this works and this is actually an indicator of how frightened Amazon is. The networks don't set the price of purchased videos, they only set the price they sell them to Amazon at, Amazon can then sell them for any price they want. In this case they are willing to sell these as loss leaders (like they have done with books in the past) to try to win marketshare before Apple gains a good foot hold. I guarantee Amazon is losing money on every one of those videos they sell.
post #12 of 84
Steve is a member of Disney's board. Disney would never pull a fast one on Apple.

At best, Amazon is getting the shows for the same price ($1 Rent $2 Purchase) and selling it at half price at a loss in order to compete.

Believe it or not, I bet that Amazon will still lose.

Wait till Apple allows third party applications on the new iOS based AppleTV...

Time will tell.
post #13 of 84
Dammit, you guys got my hopes up! It's not all Fox shows, just some select shows. For some damn reason Fringe is still $3 per episode. Does anybody know if the TV episode rental is only going to be for AppleTV or if we'll be able to rent on our Macs or iPads? I would love to be able to get Fringe for $1 per episode since season two isn't going to be out on Blu-ray until the 14th (when I will rent it from Netflix).
post #14 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by tazinlwfl View Post

I am surprised that Apple seemed to have such a "hard time" with this, and Amazon throws it out there like it was no effort at all... And how is Amazon able to do purchases for .99 and Apple can't? Is it because iTunes can be used on iDevices? Why is that such a problem for these studios/networks????

Exactly, how can the studios whine about hurting cable and sat co bla bla bla and give an hard to time to Apple for 99c TV shows then turn around and sell those same shows on amazon for the same price...
and remember some networks dont even want to rent there shows at 99 cents.

I am still gonna get an AppleTV. I really like how all the idevice fit together and love the new Airplay which allow instant playback of homemade photos and videos from idevice.
post #15 of 84
Difference is... Apple is not in the sell for a loss business like Amazon is. If that gets more people to shop at Amazon, good for them I guess.
post #16 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

Unfortunately we do not know the terms of either deal. It may be that "all other things" are not equal. Who knows.

Maybe it also has something to do with the fact that Amazon downloads are only available in the US? At least, I don't see them on Amazon.ca

Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

I don't understand what you are trying to say. Right now it looks like iTunes = .99 cents for rental, and Amazon .99 cents to own. How does that make @TV a more attractive alternative.

I think he meant the hardware and functionality is more attractive, not necessarily the price of content.
post #17 of 84
Good for Amazon. And good for me... I love it.

Your turn, Apple.
post #18 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan.blanchard View Post

Dammit, you guys got my hopes up! It's not all Fox shows, just some select shows. For some damn reason Fringe is still $3 per episode. Does anybody know if the TV episode rental is only going to be for AppleTV or if we'll be able to rent on our Macs or iPads? I would love to be able to get Fringe for $1 per episode since season two isn't going to be out on Blu-ray until the 14th (when I will rent it from Netflix).

I'm pretty sure in the presentation they said that rentals would be a feature of the new iOS.
post #19 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

I wonder if Amazon's contract was written in such a way that there is a loophole in which they can do this arbitrarily - i.e. Amazon takes the loss. Like what they did with the $9.99 pricing of ebooks.

I've never used the Amazon Video On Demand service, so is it really "to own"?

Yes, you really do own it. It is stored in the cloud and you can stream it anytime you would like without it taking up any hard drive space. I got a season of psych on it for free and it was awesome. i can still go back and watch it now. As far as browser interfaces go, it is pretty nice. It lays out all of the shows that you have in a grid much like iTunes. I really enjoy using this service.

Should I use iTunes or Amazon on Demand? It all boils down to this:

*Use iTunes, if you want on iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad, or Apple TV BUT do not care about watching more than once

*Use Amazon on Demand if you want to watch more than once BUT do not care about having it on iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad, or Apple TV.
post #20 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

I don't understand what you are trying to say. Right now it looks like iTunes = .99 cents for rental, and Amazon .99 cents to own. How does that make @TV a more attractive alternative.

Did you miss the second sentence of my post? Perhaps you should take the trouble to read a little more carefully.
post #21 of 84
Remember this is on a trial basis for Apple to show that this will sell.

Amazon wants to make sure that Apple does not meet its quota so that the deal does not continue for Apple. Amazon will lose.

I for one would rather pay $2 to Apple or Rent for $1 because of the ease of use of the AppleTV or my Mac or MobileMe cloud.

Amazon will lose twice. Apple will still sell and Amazon will sell at a loss where the more they sell, the more they lose.

Time will tell.
post #22 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercivic View Post


*Use iTunes, if you want on iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad, or Apple TV BUT do not care about watching more than once

*Use Amazon on Demand if you want to watch more than once BUT do not care about having it on iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad, or Apple TV.

with amazon you still need some kind of hardware to deliver the shows to the TV.
post #23 of 84
Presumably at some point Amazon will release a iPhone/iPad app so you can use their Video on Demand service on iOS devices. And if AppleTV gets App support I suspect Amazon will create an Video on Demand AppleTV app as well.
post #24 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

with amazon you still need some kind of hardware to deliver the shows to the TV.

I just hook my MacBook up to my TV. It's a piece of cake. I just have the $29 video adaptor from Apple. It is ridiculously easy to do. The only reason that I can come up with for people not using this is it is an underadvertised feature.
post #25 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I don't understand how it's legal for the networks to do this. By deciding they are going to give Amazon this or Apple that, they are deciding the fate of those companies to a large extent (or trying to). This is like selling cars but charging fat people more than thin ones or giving a better deal to a certain race or ethnic group.

Basic fairness says that if they offer a product at a certain price to one company that all other things being equal, they should offer the same deal to another.

You have no idea how capitalism works, do you?
Did you happen to vote for the current president?
post #26 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

Good for Amazon. And good for me... I love it.

Your turn, Apple.

The one thing that's not clear is whether Apple's rental is HD, while Amazon's ownership option is SD. Anybody know?
post #27 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan.blanchard View Post

Dammit, you guys got my hopes up! It's not all Fox shows, just some select shows. For some damn reason Fringe is still $3 per episode. Does anybody know if the TV episode rental is only going to be for AppleTV or if we'll be able to rent on our Macs or iPads? I would love to be able to get Fringe for $1 per episode since season two isn't going to be out on Blu-ray until the 14th (when I will rent it from Netflix).

I think that I read somewhere that it's only shows produced AND broadcasted by Fox or Disney/ABC that is gonna be available at this price...
Fringe may be broadcasted on Fox but it's produced by Warner... No luck...
post #28 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

You have no idea how capitalism works, do you?
Did you happen to vote for the current president?

Are you in the right place, or did you just wander in by accident?
post #29 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

The one thing that's not clear is whether Apple's rental is HD, while Amazon's ownership option is SD. Anybody know?

With Amazon you can choose: SD or HD.
post #30 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercivic View Post

With Amazon you can choose: SD or HD.

For the same price?
post #31 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

For the same price?

yep. for the shows that i looked at they are the same price. pure speculation: they are not allowed to price the shows under 99 cents.
post #32 of 84
Really? I can own an SD or HD H.264/MP3 encoded TV show for 99¢ the day after it airs? That looks like it would severely hinder the DVD and Blu-ray sales which I think are higher for a complete season and you can own it long before the season ends. Interesting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Big deal. If Amazon got that option, so would iTunes. That makes the @TV even more attractive (you would simply download it on your computer - which us what you would do with Amazon - and use AirPlay). We'll find out soon enough.

Just makes us all better off.

The larger point here is the complete lack of creativity and innovation by competitors: Why can't/don't a single one create a box, an interface and software - i.e., the whole package - that does it better than Apple? Hello!? It's pretty sad, really.......

Remember how long it took with higher bit rate DRM-free music? It was jobs that wrote the letter to end the failed DRM model for music, which was quickly scoffed at, even by CEOs who went to offer that very deal to Amazon.

LOL I remarked on Amazon having this potential with the content owners just yesterday.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...30&postcount=5
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #33 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

You have no idea how capitalism works, do you?
Did you happen to vote for the current president?

You had me then you lost me.
post #34 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercivic View Post


Should I use iTunes or Amazon on Demand? It all boils down to this:

*Use iTunes, if you want on iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad, or Apple TV BUT do not care about watching more than once

*Use Amazon on Demand if you want to watch more than once BUT do not care about having it on iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad, or Apple TV.

How do you get the Amazon on Demand video to your HDTV? Or are you watching on your computer?
post #35 of 84
[QUOTE=mercivic;1706247]

Quote:
Originally Posted by mercivic View Post

I just hook my MacBook up to my TV. It's a piece of cake. I just have the $29 video adaptor from Apple. It is ridiculously easy to do. The only reason that I can come up with for people not using this is it is an underadvertised feature.

Oh, I see. One reason more people don't do it your way is they don't have this years MacBook Pro, which sens video and audio to HDMI. I use my MacBook (last years model) to do that, but need two cables.
post #36 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Big deal. If Amazon got that option, so would iTunes. That makes the @TV even more attractive (you would simply download it on your computer - which us what you would do with Amazon - and use AirPlay). We'll find out soon enough.

Just makes us all better off.

The larger point here is the complete lack of creativity and innovation by competitors: Why can't/don't a single one create a box, an interface and software - i.e., the whole package - that does it better than Apple? Hello!? It's pretty sad, really.......

It seems to me that Amazon is playing the same game here that they play with books and mp3s.

They're willing to lose money on every sale to get marketshare. I don't see how the networks would give Amazon a better deal than they give Apple, esp. ABC.

Amazon wants to be a power in the download anything market, and now they're big enough to throw away a lot of money to do so.
post #37 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I don't understand how it's legal for the networks to do this. By deciding they are going to give Amazon this or Apple that, they are deciding the fate of those companies to a large extent (or trying to). This is like selling cars but charging fat people more than thin ones or giving a better deal to a certain race or ethnic group.

Basic fairness says that if they offer a product at a certain price to one company that all other things being equal, they should offer the same deal to another.

Like I said, Amazon is likely losing money on every sale, just as they did with books and mp3s.
post #38 of 84
I'm still waiting for the "all you can eat" subscription model. Any song, movie, or TV show, on-demand - all the time.
post #39 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

You have no idea how capitalism works, do you?
Did you happen to vote for the current president?

This is very much a conservative thing. Lose money on every sale, and make it up on volume. That's why the country is in such a mess right now.
post #40 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Really? I can own an SD or HD H.264/MP3 encoded TV show for 99¢ the day after it airs? That looks like it would severely hinder the DVD and Blu-ray sales which I think are higher for a complete season and you can own it long before the season ends. Interesting.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showp...30&postcount=5

It's even better than that: your shows are stored in the cloud!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Amazon offers purchases of Fox and ABC shows for 99 cents