or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple's TV service would pay networks to allow ad skipping, report says
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's TV service would pay networks to allow ad skipping, report says - Page 2

post #41 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post

The way I see it, television is somewhat analogous to music albums pre-iTunes. The individual channels (tracks) are lumped together in packages (albums). Some channels are more popular (singles) while others are essentially filler.

Packages are currently as overpriced as $16 albums back in '99.

It would be awesome if you could subscribe to individual channels for anywhere between $0.99 to $4.99 per month (based on popularity), or "Complete my Package" for, say $10-30 a month (cheaper than subscribing to all individually).

Packages could be grouped by subject matter (Sports, Political, Science, Culture, Comedy, Movies, etc). So you could mix and match, or subscribe to whole packages.

Of course, the music industry caved because of Napster and piracy. Are torrents widespread enough to provide motivation, or are DVRs cutting into ad revenue enough? We'll see.

So you'd want the TV industry to wait 13 years before they make more when they're making plenty right now. They're not in dire straits like the music industry was plus there are plenty of alternate choices other than Apple.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #42 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

I wish I could only pay for Formula One and view it online. Same with Tennis, Golf and well that's about it! Maybe Ironman.

I would gladly do this and watch it via my ATV.

Fingers crossed! It's coming. 1smile.gif

P.S. Couldn't Apple buy one of the Sat TV networks and just bypass all the greedy regional cable companies. How many Apple customers would switch to an Apple TV provider? All of them?

Then the set top box could be an AppleTV...All problems solved! 1smile.gif

I agree. If I could cherry pick things i wanted from the networks I'd gladly pay to have them on demand. Apple should come up with packages you can tailor to suit your own needs from various networks, perhaps with better pricing as you add more. Personally I'd like to see the networks work with the likes of Apple and begin the demise of the cable companies as content providers.
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #43 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmason1270 View Post

 

I have suggested Apple buy Dish multiple times to only be laughed at. Glad to see thta there is someone else a little crazy too :)

 

I have as well. Either DirecTV or Dish. It wouldn't matter which. Either could easily be purchased with cash.

When in doubt read the instructions.
Reply
When in doubt read the instructions.
Reply
post #44 of 66
I think I see how this would work. In IOS games, you can pay a fee to skip levels in games, or purchase premium content that might otherwise take weeks to acquire. Likewise, you can pay a fee to remove ads from free apps. I suspect Apple wants to give consumers the option of paying 99 cents to skip commercials for one individual show/movie. This 99 cents fee (the same amount it costs to buy one episode of a show) might also also include a digital copy of the episode, via the iTunes store, that would effectively mean that the customer has purchased a digital copy of the particular episode.
post #45 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by masterkona View Post

I think I see how this would work. In IOS games, you can pay a fee to skip levels in games, or purchase premium content that might otherwise take weeks to acquire. Likewise, you can pay a fee to remove ads from free apps. I suspect Apple wants to give consumers the option of paying 99 cents to skip commercials for one individual show/movie. This 99 cents fee might also also include a digital copy of the episode, via the iTunes store, that would effectively mean that the customer has purchased a digital copy of the particular episode.

You can do that now for $1.99, and don't kid yourself about $.99 shows. I doubt that'll ever be the case.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #46 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

The trouble with that argument though is that no one ever gives up the numbers and the numbers can easily be fudged. We actually have nothing but the word of those in charge as to what things actually cost.

Given that Netflix can create original content of the same level of quality as HBO and still only charge people $8.00 a month flat fee, there is a strong argument that cable TV has been gouging us for years and years.

Well, you can look at earnings reports.

As was mentioned, cable companies also have infrastructure to maintain.

Plus, Netflix isn't exactly a solid business or making money. They keep needing more cash.
post #47 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post

Well, you can look at earnings reports.

As was mentioned, cable companies also have infrastructure to maintain.

Plus, Netflix isn't exactly a solid business or making money. They keep needing more cash.

But their stock keeps going up and up.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #48 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

So you'd want the TV industry to wait 13 years before they make more when they're making plenty right now. They're not in dire straits like the music industry was plus there are plenty of alternate choices other than Apple.

That was my point at the end; the music industry had outside pressure and NEEDED a savior. The TV industry isn't to that point yet, unless things like torrenting and DVRs get much worse.
post #49 of 66

Paying to skip adds is a well balanced idea.

The programming gets paid for, the broadcasters make their money and the advertisers save money.  Everybody wins.

With a huge customer base, it adds up.

 

If I skip an ad, I probably don't care for it anyway so for the advertiser to pay to force me to watch it is foolish.

 

This will also force advertisers to make more creative advertising that people want to watch.

post #50 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

But their stock keeps going up and up.

They're buying blue sky. The fundamentals aren't currently solid.

People put too much emphasis on stocks. Business succeed or fail based on fundamentals; whether they make or lose money.

If stock price was an accurate indicator, all those dotcom companies would still be around.
post #51 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmason1270 View Post

I have suggested Apple buy Dish multiple times to only be laughed at. Glad to see thta there is someone else a little crazy too 1smile.gif

Is it for sale?

Everything's for sale. At the right price. :-/
post #52 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post

They're buying blue sky. The fundamentals aren't currently solid.

People put too much emphasis on stocks. Business succeed or fail based on fundamentals; whether they make or lose money.

If stock price was an accurate indicator, all those dotcom companies would still be around.

Seems pretty solid to me when 1 out of 3 on the internet at night are using the service. I think that they priced themselves a little too low but they're making moves instead of sitting idly by.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #53 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post


That was my point at the end; the music industry had outside pressure and NEEDED a savior. The TV industry isn't to that point yet, unless things like torrenting and DVRs get much worse.

Yes they are.  People are cutting the chords left and right.

If US broadcasters don't take the advantage, foreign broadcasters will.  

Take British Sky News for example, they rocks in the US on Apple TV.  They could render CNN obsolete for example.

 

If content owners agree to remain hostage behind the US cable companies, they will lose big time.  

No more bundling of crappy programming.


Edited by AppleSauce007 - 7/15/13 at 7:15pm
post #54 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post

Yes they are.  People are cutting the chords left and right.
If US broadcasters don't take the advantage, foreign broadcasters will.  
Take British Sky News for example, they rocks in the US on Apple TV.  They could render CNN obsolete for example.

If content owners agree to remain hostage behind the cable companies, they will lose big time.

That's what Apple needs to sell them. They don't think they're doomed.
post #55 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Seems pretty solid to me when 1 out of 3 on the internet at night are using the service. I think that they priced themselves a little too low but they're making moves instead of sitting idly by.

Solid at market share, maybe, but that doesn't mean they have a solid business model. Their cash flow is terrible, they're undercapitalized, and they don't make enough money.

Right now it's all blue sky.
post #56 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post


Well, you can look at earnings reports.

As was mentioned, cable companies also have infrastructure to maintain.

Plus, Netflix isn't exactly a solid business or making money. They keep needing more cash.

 

I still think on balance that we are being gouged.  The main reason is because the cable companies and networks have been in the driving seat for decades and it's just the way business works that when you're on top you generally rape everyone as much as you can.  Also, Networks survived for years solely on the revenue from commercials, and there's also the consideration that huge amounts of money are being spent on absolute crap nowadays.  it seems likely that huge amounts of money are being wasted and falling through the cracks, propping up bad shows and bad ideas, etc.  I think the networks and cable companies probably *need* a kick in the teeth and to fail catastrophically so that some kind of balance can be restored.  

 

Personally after cutting the cable a few years back I can't see any reason to go back.  There simply isn't anything on regular network or cable TV of any quality or interest to me.  IMO Netflix, HBO, BBC and a few others produce good shows and are probably worth paying for but even then the vast majority of even those channels is dreck (again IMO of course).  For me, almost all the really good shows come from Europe anyway, and they aren't even available legally in North America so I feel quite comfortable torrenting them for free at the moment since the producers don't deign to make them available.  

 

It will probably be five, or even ten years before I can legally get the movies and TV shows that I actually want to see and by then the whole landscape will be different so I really don't feel I even have a horse in the race sort of speak.  I'm sure it will work itself out by then and with luck we'll be able to just pick what we want to see and pay a fair and reasonable price.  In today's market I would judge that "fair" price to be roughly one quarter of what iTunes currently charges to purchase a season of a TV show.  

post #57 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post


Solid at market share, maybe, but that doesn't mean they have a solid business model. Their cash flow is terrible, they're undercapitalized, and they don't make enough money.

Right now it's all blue sky.

 

I think you've just described Amazon's business model, and they are the darling of the market right now.  1smile.gif

post #58 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Personally after cutting the cable a few years back I can't see any reason to go back.

How can you see a reason for going back if you're not watching anything? After not watching TV for years because I couldn't stand all the reality show plus cop show on top of cop show I started watching shows like Boardwalk Empire, Game of Thrones, Homeland, The Walking Dead, The Killing, and others and was pleasantly surprised at how good and different they were. Yes many networks play it safe and create shows from a hit one but there are others that aren't afraid to raise the bar and buck the trends.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #59 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I think you've just described Amazon's business model, and they are the darling of the market right now.  1smile.gif

Because regardless of how bad their business model is customers are still flocking to them and they have little competition.
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"I got the answer by talking in my brain and I agreed of the answer my brain got" a 7 yr old explaining his math HW
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #60 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

Because regardless of how bad their business model is customers are still flocking to them and they have little competition.

Yes, but the sole goal of a business is to make money. If a business doesn't make money and isn't sound financially, eventually it will fail. Right now, the market is forming a bubble... They keep thinking that "someday" they'll flip a switch and start raking in the money.

To a lesser extent, that's why Google is also a darling of the market. They make lots of money, sure, but not that much. The market thinks eventually they'll make a lot more money than they're currently making, and has inflated its price accordingly.

When will "someday" come?

On the other hand, companies like Apple that have solid financials and make loads of cash are punished.
post #61 of 66

I only keep over-the-air digital TV subscription to watch sports, but it's so cheap that my bottom line is not affected. It's about 10 USD a month. Movies and TV shows i buy online (iTunes, Amazon, Bluray if the movie is worth it). It turns out i saved a lot and didn't waste my time trying to filter all the crap on TV. Next time i'm using actual TV will be september to watch  Eurobasket 2013.

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply

Which of us is the fisherman and which the trout?

Reply
post #62 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Attewell View Post

From my view... Apple is trying to bypass every TV station in the world....

It will provide TV viewing on a on-demand basis.. with 2 options
- with adverts inserted to local area/country, time demographic, and program being viewed
- without adverts, paid subscription..

This is what Apple CEO said, when he said "the model hasn't changed since 1960's"

This will open up even more TV to rest of world.. than what is currently provided

This is my big hope too. I haven't watched live tv/cable for years. I certainly do all I can to avoid adverts.

 

I only have so much time to watch tv/films so it makes sense to just get the programs I want/like. I currently have a backlog of films and tv series I want to watch so there's no shortage of content, but I'm not gonna sit through adverts like it's the seventies. I will pay to avoid ads.

 

Hopefully a future Apple TV will provide me with access to all the shows I want without ads and I won't have to wait until x months after the show first aired in the US.

 

Crazy thing is, if the shows I like/want to watch came out on Blu-Ray at the same time as they are aired on TV I would buy them on release to get to watch them in 1080p. Unfortunately BluRays tend to be released far too late and as I don't re-watch anything (well maybe the odd movie after x years) I don't get to buy many BluRays. Talk about lost opportunities for revenue.

post #63 of 66

If I'm paying for a premium service, I want the commercials to be gone, not just the option to skip them.  Maybe that's what is meant.  But if it means the commercials still play and I just have the option to FF, that's kinda crappy.

post #64 of 66
Unless it bests TiVo in every way it's a no-go for me. And for god's sake they better have a remote that is as good as TiVo's. Not that error-guaranteeing abomination that comes with ATV.
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #65 of 66
Not as exciting as a fully fledged Apple iTV, but a step forward none the less. The barriers to this brave new world of media are the broadcasters and cable companies not Apple, if it wasn't for them Apple would of released this tech years ago!
post #66 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Unless it bests TiVo in every way it's a no-go for me. And for god's sake they better have a remote that is as good as TiVo's. Not that error-guaranteeing abomination that comes with ATV.

While I would agree that the little remote it comes with isn't all that great, the app for the iPhone, iPod and iPad for controlling it are really nice.

When in doubt read the instructions.
Reply
When in doubt read the instructions.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Apple's TV service would pay networks to allow ad skipping, report says