Apple wants subscription TV service to include live local broadcasts, content rights remain roadbloc
The main hold-up in Apple launching a subscription TV service is content rights, with a new report on Friday saying the company could again face delays as it seeks to include live, local network television stations.
Network broadcasts are freely available through the use of an old-fashioned, over-the-air antenna. But the rights to streaming those very same broadcasts over public airways aren't so simple.
That appears to be one of the major stumbling blocks for Apple as it looks to launch a subscription TV service, according to Re/code. Reporters Peter Kafka and Dawn Chmielewski said on Friday that Apple may not be able to launch its service this fall, as originally intended, because of issues in negotiations with content owners.
Still, the service appears to be a matter of "when," not "if," as TV executives reportedly indicated they believe money is the main sticking point between the industry and Apple.
But at the moment, it's not believed that any content owners have officially signed up for Apple's rumored service. That means it's unlikely that it will be announced alongside an anticipated new Apple TV set-top box at next month's Worldwide Developers Conference.
Apple CEO Tim Cook announces new Apple TV pricing at April's "Spring Forward" event.
According to the report, Apple not only wants to have access to local broadcast TV, but also on a wide scale, across the U.S. Doing so will be a challenge, as even ABC itself reportedly spent two years obtaining the rights to live broadcasting for just eight cities with its Watch ABC app, available for devices like the iPhone and iPad.
Reports from earlier this year indicated Apple was looking to charge a base price of between $30 and $40 per month for its anticipated subscription TV service. Including widespread access to local network stations would be a key differentiator from competing services like Dish's Sling TV or Sony's Vue.
It's been claimed that Apple is in talks with broadcast networks ABC, CBS and Fox, as well as other cable networks owned by Viacom and Discovery, though apparently talks have stalled with Comcast-owned NBC.
As for the new Apple TV set-top box, a major revamp of the hardware is expected when WWDC kicks off on June 8. Rumors have said the new Apple TV will feature an A8 processor, a dedicated App Store, Siri voice controls, and a new touchpad controller.
Network broadcasts are freely available through the use of an old-fashioned, over-the-air antenna. But the rights to streaming those very same broadcasts over public airways aren't so simple.
That appears to be one of the major stumbling blocks for Apple as it looks to launch a subscription TV service, according to Re/code. Reporters Peter Kafka and Dawn Chmielewski said on Friday that Apple may not be able to launch its service this fall, as originally intended, because of issues in negotiations with content owners.
Still, the service appears to be a matter of "when," not "if," as TV executives reportedly indicated they believe money is the main sticking point between the industry and Apple.
But at the moment, it's not believed that any content owners have officially signed up for Apple's rumored service. That means it's unlikely that it will be announced alongside an anticipated new Apple TV set-top box at next month's Worldwide Developers Conference.
Apple CEO Tim Cook announces new Apple TV pricing at April's "Spring Forward" event.
According to the report, Apple not only wants to have access to local broadcast TV, but also on a wide scale, across the U.S. Doing so will be a challenge, as even ABC itself reportedly spent two years obtaining the rights to live broadcasting for just eight cities with its Watch ABC app, available for devices like the iPhone and iPad.
Reports from earlier this year indicated Apple was looking to charge a base price of between $30 and $40 per month for its anticipated subscription TV service. Including widespread access to local network stations would be a key differentiator from competing services like Dish's Sling TV or Sony's Vue.
It's been claimed that Apple is in talks with broadcast networks ABC, CBS and Fox, as well as other cable networks owned by Viacom and Discovery, though apparently talks have stalled with Comcast-owned NBC.
As for the new Apple TV set-top box, a major revamp of the hardware is expected when WWDC kicks off on June 8. Rumors have said the new Apple TV will feature an A8 processor, a dedicated App Store, Siri voice controls, and a new touchpad controller.
Comments
I would think you could start with at least one major city group of flagship stations to represent every time zone and then build from there.
I can't wait to see all those crappy locally produced Medford commercials again, that I have been "missing" since I disconnected tv 5 years ago.
Either Apple is required and the content owners are force to STFU, or Apple is not required to carry local stations...
I wonder if all this time it's taking Apple to secure these deals is/will hurt them.
Would Apple be better off launching the service sooner and slowly adding content through the years?
Certainly Netflix and others aren't standing still.
"...they believe money is the main sticking point..."
Well, *this* is truly unexpected!
Apparently it's taken Microsoft over 2 years to get this working for XBox. Also who wants to watch TV over an antenna with a sometime crappy signal?
I've not yet "cut the cord", but I did recently install an outdoor antenna and receive ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, CW, and some other "junk".
I'd like to see an Apple TV that excludes local programming (considering that's a "hold up"), but includes a tuner for such.
As for TV streaming services, Apple has been trying to craft a deal with the networks since SJ was still alive and well. Years later it's still in the rumor stage. I have no doubt Apple will pull it off but it's all dependent on releasing a modern Apple TV first.
It's amazing that all these people don't work for Apple. The solution would be so simple. This issue is more complex than many realize. The sentence about it taking 2 years to get only 8 of their own stations up is very telling. If anybody can unravel this Gordion knot, Apple can, but it will neither be fast nor cheap.
They really need to stop trying to bundle things together that people don't want. I and most Americans can get the networks in HD for free using just a cheap HD antenna, please don't add them to your service and then make me pay for things I can get for free. At the very least make the networks an add on package and NOT part of the base.
It's this "one size fits all" mentality that is driving people away from cable tv in droves right now.
The biggest news here is Apple want to move all local TV network on to the Internet and delivered to any Internet connected (apple) devices.
However i am not sure how the Network and broadband today is going to handle it.
You have no clue what a Soviet-era product feels like. And congrats on supporting Samsung, who stole their 4K tech from Sony (who had a 4K TV in 2008). Supporting the actual innovator is passe these days I suppose.
There are always roadblocks in negotiations for new stuff. Apple always gets through these somehow. It really isn't news.
> channels in their packages these days. Clearly it can be done
> (though I recall it did take time to add them all).
The article is talking about streaming services, like Dish's Sling TV, not their satellite broadcast service.
The point is that satellite bypassess the typical local OTA format already.
Having a technological solution will force the negotiations along as well...Apple shouldn't have to kow tow to these providers/middle entities who are interfering with the future.