Apple's content negotiation tactics have 'alienated' cable providers & networks - report

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
Apple has allegedly taken a hardline approach in negotiating with content owners for a potential $30-per-month streaming television service --?a strategy that may have backfired on the company, a new report suggests.




Citing people familiar with the negotiations, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday that Apple's offers were stunningly low, even to close partner Disney, leaving content owners feeling "alienated." Of particular issue was said to be Apple's demand to lock in, for several years, monthly rates per viewer, a major change from how TV networks traditionally operate and increase profits.

Apple's negotiations were said to be handled by Eddy Cue, the company's senior vice preside of Internet Software and Services. Disney, in particular, was said to be eager to sign up for an Apple streaming service, until they heard the proposed terms.

Disney's lack of interest is particularly noteworthy because the company's CEO, Bob Iger, serves on Apple's board of directors, and the two companies have worked closely together for years, dating back to Disney's acquisition of Pixar from Apple co-founder Steve Jobs in 2006.

Unsurprisingly, other major content owners weren't receptive to Cue's pitch either. The Journal said Apple's negotiations with both 21st Century Fox and CBS failed to gain traction.




Apple's alleged plans called for a $30-per-month service that would feature both live channels and an on-demand library of content.

Talks between Apple and content owners have been ongoing for some time. The company originally hoped to announce a streaming TV service at WWDC 2015 and launch it alongside the fourth-generation Apple TV.

When talks collapsed, Apple pushed forward and released new Apple TV hardware and software, with a dedicated tvOS App Store, last fall.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 70
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 3,679member
    Way to go Eddy! I'm sure his bonus was larger than ever.
    bdkennedy1002cnocbuilatifbp1983DavidAlGregory
  • Reply 2 of 70
    calicali Posts: 3,495member
    What exactly has this "close partnership" with Disney done for Apple in any way?

    I can't think of anything besides the Mickey watch face.
    latifbpDavidAlGregory
  • Reply 3 of 70
    stompystompy Posts: 319member
    So now we have a few more details about why Disney bought a 33% stake in MLB streaming.
  • Reply 4 of 70
    Way to go Eddy! I'm sure his bonus was larger than ever.
    This would be a good opportunity to replace Eddy, then offer them a little extra so they accept it out of relief. 

    cali said:
    What exactly has this "close partnership" with Disney done for Apple in any way?

    I can't think of anything besides the Mickey watch face.
    Really, since the early days of iTunes movies and TV shows they haven't done anything special. 
  • Reply 5 of 70
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    hmm, yes let's treat a rumor by the WSJ (of all people with anti Apple axe) and "people familiar with the matter" (code for bullshit) as gospel. 
    latifbpindyfxrob53ration almagman1979lolliverpscooter63argonaut
  • Reply 6 of 70
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    Way to go Eddy! I'm sure his bonus was larger than ever.
    if only it was as clear to Tim Cook how poorly Cue performs his duties as it is to you. poor guy is just blind, isn't he? I know -- you could send him a memo! yes, help dear Cook out!!
    latifbpindyfxmike1tmayfastasleeph2plolliverpscooter63argonautthompr
  • Reply 7 of 70
    horvatichorvatic Posts: 111member
    Hey it could be the other way around you know.
  • Reply 8 of 70
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,210member
    The Imperial Cable TV Senate will soon be swept away.Cook and Cue will acquire the licenses to the content, and then they will crush the cable TV companies with one swift stroke. Fear will keep the local stations in line. Fear of loss of ad revenue that all goes to Apple.
    edited July 2016 latifbpjbishop1039pscooter63argonaut
  • Reply 9 of 70
    red oakred oak Posts: 627member
    It's all going to apps anyway.  HBO, Netflix, CBS, etc...  It is only matter of time.  A bundled service of channels is making less and less sense 

    Apple needs nothing from the cable providers.  The less they work with them, the better 

    What would be interesting if Apple could add an antenna to Apple TV for to pull in live HDTV channels which are mandated by law.   ABC, NBC, CBS.  That would help secure sine live sports programming 
    awilliams87nolamacguyration alradster360Deelronargonaut1983badmonk
  • Reply 10 of 70
    horvatichorvatic Posts: 111member
    Cable companies know they have the power and they don't want to lose it so they will not negotiate.

    rob53Deelronmwhitedasanman69argonaut
  • Reply 11 of 70
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,681member
    If Apple really wants this to happen, they'll need someone like Phil Schiller (maybe even Tim Cook as well) to do the negotiations . 
    edited July 2016
  • Reply 12 of 70
    levilevi Posts: 344member
    Well the industry changing pretty fast. Dish and other providers are bleeding customers and if content makers think the avg person will sign up for more one or more standalone services (i.e. HBO NOW, MLB, Netflix, etc) they're only fooling themselves. We officially cut the cord last week. Dish came back with the full package for $30/month for the first year. I'm happy to pay that locked in, and in a well packaged product. We use Sling now, which is serviceable, but a far cry from the TV app experience. 
  • Reply 13 of 70
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,210member
    red oak said:
    It's all going to apps anyway.  HBO, Netflix, CBS, etc...  It is only matter of time.  A bundled service of channels is making less and less sense 

    Apple needs nothing from the cable providers.  The less they work with them, the better 

    What would be interesting if Apple could add an antenna to Apple TV for to pull in live HDTV channels which are mandated by law.   ABC, NBC, CBS.  That would help secure sine live sports programming 
    This is interesting:

    www.silicondust.com/hdhomerun/

    There is a (albeit rather expensive) ATV app called "Channels" that works with this; and an iOS version for iPhone/iPad.

    Maybe SiliconDust is an acquisition target by AAPL. It does seem like maybe this technology is a standalone box, not an addition to ATV. But who knows - maybe an ATV with a tuner system in it is a separate model.
    willcropoint
  • Reply 14 of 70
    horvatichorvatic Posts: 111member
    Everyone assumes that because Apple didn't get something started with the cable companies that it is there fault. Remember the old saying when you assume. You make an ass out of you and me.
    nolamacguyDeelronmwhitelolliverargonaut
  • Reply 15 of 70
    coolfactorcoolfactor Posts: 1,345member
    Yah, but sitting in front of a TV is slow 90s. It's all about mobile! :smile: 

    I'm paying $10 per month for Netflix and honestly, I would not pay more than that... when I only watch one TV episode a night before bed, and maybe an occasional movie. Maybe I sound cheap, but the nickel-and-diming these days is becoming overwhelming to manage. No wonder I have no money left over.

    Maybe Apple can turn the tides and make TV awesome again?
    technoawilliams87lolliverargonaut
  • Reply 16 of 70
    levilevi Posts: 344member
    Well the industry changing pretty fast. Dish and other providers are bleeding customers and if content makers think the avg person will sign up for more one or more standalone services (i.e. HBO NOW, MLB, Netflix, etc) they're only fooling themselves. We officially cut the cord last week. Dish came back with the full package for $30/month for the first year. I'm happy to pay that locked in, and in a well packaged product. We use Sling now, which is serviceable, but a far cry from the TV app experience. 
  • Reply 17 of 70
    technotechno Posts: 678member
    People will not pay high monthly fees for crap they don't want. I think Apple knows this and that is why they are holding firm. It is a shame though.
    awilliams87lolliver
  • Reply 18 of 70
    Way to go Eddy! I'm sure his bonus was larger than ever.
    Yes, way to go, Eddy! You rock!!

    The studios see Apple's cash and want a sweeter deal than they are currently getting from others. Locking in rates for a few years means studios can't gauge customers every year nor force customers to have programming they do not want. The WSJ will not report this side of the story because it would make Apple look good. Having Apple look good is bad.

    Disney was eager. Really? Wasn't it reported Disney wanted ESPN packaged with any deal with Apple even though Apple was not interested in ESPN? Any sweet deal from with provides studios with a stronger negotiating tactics with others. Rates would rise, which would cause customers to pay more. We know the DOJ would blame Apple not the studios for higher customer fees.

    So, keep up the hardball negotiating tactics, Eddy! The longer the studios holdout due to greed, the more time you have to get your  own original programming lined up, which will enable you to move forward without studio programming.
    robin hubertdknoxration alDeelronfastasleeplolliverargonautbrucemc
  • Reply 19 of 70
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,713member
    Way to go Eddy! I'm sure his bonus was larger than ever.
    Yes, way to go, Eddy! You rock!!

    The studios see Apple's cash and want a sweeter deal than they are currently getting from others. 

    So, keep up the hardball negotiating tactics, Eddy! The longer the studios holdout due to greed, the more time you have to get your  own original programming lined up, which will enable you to move forward without studio programming.
    I thought Apple recently said they weren't too interested in original programming? 

    EDIT: Yes they did.
    “We’re not in the business of trying to create TV shows,” Cue said. “If we see it being complementary to the things we’re doing at Apple Music or if we see it being something that’s innovative on our platform, we may help them and guide them and make suggestions. But we’re not trying to compete with Netflix or compete with Comcast.”
    edited July 2016 cnocbui
  • Reply 20 of 70
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,371member
    red oak said:
    It's all going to apps anyway.  HBO, Netflix, CBS, etc...  It is only matter of time.  A bundled service of channels is making less and less sense 

    Apple needs nothing from the cable providers.  The less they work with them, the better 

    What would be interesting if Apple could add an antenna to Apple TV for to pull in live HDTV channels which are mandated by law.   ABC, NBC, CBS.  That would help secure sine live sports programming 

    Here is the problem, most of the large cable operators own most of the good content. Apple does need them more than they need Apple. Personally if Apple could land a deal with Discovery Networks, I would be happen and drop what I have and switch over to Apple and Discovery. Discovery has the worlds largest view audience for their combine content with a little over a 1B viewers. This could be a huge win for apple to land them. But I understand is Discovery is not interest in streaming all their content especially the most popular one.
Sign In or Register to comment.