I don't think it matters who is picking the tempo, but given that the average is going down and that the audience is stable at best, I can't help but think that those that pick the tempo end up doing so to the detriment for a wider interest in order to satisfy a small segment of their audience.
I'm not sure I get this Jeff. Are you saying the reason why Classical and Jazz has been dying as a recording classification is because all of the players in both genre's are playing slower?
Why not? I don't truly know if there is causation, but the correlation seems to be there. What I do know is that I'm not big on making music into a form of sleeping medicine, or paying for that treatment.
Why not? I don't truly know if there is causation, but the correlation seems to be there. What I do know is that I'm not big on making music into a form of sleeping medicine, or paying for that treatment.
Well Jeff, I'm leaving this one alone, because I truly don't know what to say, and that's something!
[QUOTE=sunilraman;1041600]In Australia we know get a "version" of Sci-Fi channel (full branding, etc..) but it shows delayed material compared to the US. This is only on CableTV (Foxtel, the only major mainstream pay TV available in Australia).
iTunes and other online stores have no chance of defeating P2P if the television stations aren't willing to allow simultaneous broadcast outside the US so that iTunes can release TV shows simultaneously everywhere. In Canada, this isn't as much as a problem as in Australia since the Canadian TV stations simulcast most American material, but we still don't have TV or movies on iTunes. In Canada, P2P is still the only way to download TV shows. If CanCon/AussieCon laws get in the way of plans for TV broadcast, we can just skip TV distribution entirely and go straight to iTunes.
If I were Apple, I would be pushing very hard for global licenses from all the major studios and TV stations. I would also like to see some Canadian TV shows if a Canadian version comes out.
and how many in Australia? 30 million? Now, multiply that effort by 30, and come up with the costs to get the licenses, divided by the number of contents sold per capita. The costs are much higher.
There are only just 20 million of us now, past that make sometime last year.[/QUOTE]
Canada (where I live) has a population slightly smaller than the US state of California, and Australia has a population similar to that of Texas and New York State. Would Apple be willing to pull out of California (where its headquarters are located), New York or Texas? Don't think so. Therefore, Apple should pay as much attention to Canada and Australia as it does to California and New York. We are clearly not a small market.
There are only just 20 million of us now, past that make sometime last year.
Canada (where I live) has a population slightly smaller than the US state of California, and Australia has a population similar to that of Texas and New York State. Would Apple be willing to pull out of California (where its headquarters are located), New York or Texas? Don't think so. Therefore, Apple should pay as much attention to Canada and Australia as it does to California and New York. We are clearly not a small market.
Shows the problem these forums have with the way they drop previous posts.
That was from me.
I was giving the benefit of the doubt to the numbers.
It's not the same thing as being in one state in the US, where all of the rules are the same with licensing of content.
The costs are far more when setting up in a foreign jurisdiction. All negotiating must start from scratch. It's time consuming, and expensive. Laws are different as well. The cost of capital is different, etc.
There are 300 million people in the US. vs. 20 million there. It costs about the same to get the contracts finished and the store set up. Apple, and other companies, will take their time.
In this country there is legislation that dictates how much locally produced content has to be aired each week, (can't quite remeber the numbers at a the moment). So the local FTA networks, there are only 3, spend as little as possible on local content, in almost all cases it is reality tv or game shows.
The networks then spend the rest of the programming budgets on supposed news and current affairs (mostly just irritainment as someone earlier nicely quoted).
Most the rest of the programing money goes on American content.
If an FTA chaneel wants to buy say Lost, they negotiate deals that give them the rights to that one particualr show but also ties them into buying dozens of other BAD shows that that must also air or they do not get the rights the next time they are negotiated.
It's the same in Canada, where commercial TV is becoming more and more irrelevant. Fortunately, under Canadian law, Internet distribution is exempt from Canadian Content regulation from the CRTC (our TV, radio and communications regulator), so the American TV companies should consider direct-to-Internet distribution in Canada. Almost everyone in my university residence at University of Toronto uses P2P to download TV shows, so there is a big market.
...It's not the same thing as being in one state in the US, where all of the rules are the same with licensing of content.
The costs are far more when setting up in a foreign jurisdiction. All negotiating must start from scratch. It's time consuming, and expensive. Laws are different as well. The cost of capital is different, etc.
There are 300 million people in the US. vs. 20 million there. It costs about the same to get the contracts finished and the store set up. Apple, and other companies, will take their time.
Yeah it cuts both ways. On one hand, you've got growth potential. I like andrewpmk's analogy in the sense that, imagine you're a US company operating in the US. Now, suddenly, there's like this whole other California [Canada] or New York State [Australia] [in terms of population] with similar or close to similar levels of GDP, and OMFG, they speak English too..!!
On the other hand though, they are *different* countries. Apple has achieved some phenomenal stuff with music licensing with iTunes Store. Cracking Europe+UK, and getting Australia and NewZealand in the mix.
Maybe in terms of music there's always been a flow around (dare I mention Kylie Minogue?? **ducks from Aussies hurling stuff at me**) of Australian, NZ, UK, US artists. For example, Wolfmother is from Sydney and they won a US Grammy for "Best Hard Rock"... http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...2/s1845609.htm
It is frustrating for users and clearly the bucket has big leaks in it, ie. P2P. I'm not sure what Apple needs to do but there is space for innovation here on how to approach and license media on a global scale, in the *most efficient* way. On top of this, remember all the telco negotiation with iPhone Apple has to do.
Hard to say how they're gonna do it, but the Pixar-Disney-Steve Jobs tie up is one way. Just say, hell, we'll be a media distributor ourselves.
Maybe Apple is hoarding a sh1tload of cash to prepare to --- wait for it --- start buying out media distribution and mobile operator companies. You read it here first.
Could this be something behind the new Apple, Inc. rebranding? And guess what, there's a lot of circumventing of monopoly laws available, since Apple will be buying different companies in different locales. Outside the EU and US trading blocs, individual countries are fair game.
Hoard up that cash, raise a bit more equity if needed, then start carpet bombing the acquisition market by buying up tv/film distributors and mobile phone operators.
I bet Steve would love to give all these "old media" owners and distributors a swift kick up the arse this way...!!!!11!!
Apple Computer was your friendly neighbourhood fruit company. Apple, Inc. might make Microsoft look like a bunch of hippies in the next decade or two.
Ireland, you've been in enough discussions about this to know that it has little to do with what Apple wants to do.
It's all a matter of the broken licensing system, particularly outside of the US. At least here, we are a very large market, with one licensing system. Outside the US, Apple has to deal with dozens. Even in the so called "EU", there are many different systems to deal with. Many of those systems are much more restrictive in what they want. Apple has to negotiate with each one of them.
Then there is the whole DRM question. With a number of European countries talking about or envoloved in court challenges to DRM and Apple's Fair Play it might not be the best market to get into at the moment, and even if Apple wants to the Studio's might not want to until the courts are fully behind their rights to distribute DRM content.
In the US there is no serious legal challenge to DRM at the moment as far as I know, and if there were it would be taking on Apple for Fair Play and Microsoft for their latest WMP which limites DRM audio/video support to systems running Windows OS. WallMart, as well as all the movie studios and recording studios would proabably be pulled into it as well since the are going to be distribuiting content in the WMP format. Then there is going to be BlockBuster and NetFlix as well as anyone else who wants to try their hand at online rental distribution. This will be a daunting legal battle that probably wont happen in the pro buisness US, while it is a lot more likely in the Europe.
Of course it is all going to depend on the success in getting that content into the living room. AppleTV is going to have an advantage in their UI and well known distribution model, while the other side will have the advantage in the more flexible licensing schemes in WMP allowing both purchases and rentals.
If I were Apple, I would be pushing very hard for global licenses from all the major studios and TV stations. I would also like to see some Canadian TV shows if a Canadian version comes out.
I wish Apple would start up its own media company. Signing bands to release iTunes exclusive music and creating TV shows to create iTunes exclusive video.
It would not only help to keep people interested in iTunes as there one stop shop for all things media but also increase revenue by not paying out the substantial fees to the record and televison studios.
With Jobs history of making Pixar into a great studio, I think Apple can do it with the other media too.
It's the same in Canada, where commercial TV is becoming more and more irrelevant. Fortunately, under Canadian law, Internet distribution is exempt from Canadian Content regulation from the CRTC (our TV, radio and communications regulator), so the American TV companies should consider direct-to-Internet distribution in Canada. Almost everyone in my university residence at University of Toronto uses P2P to download TV shows, so there is a big market.
If that happened, the authorities, at the instigation of the Canadian media, would find some way to stop it.
Yeah it cuts both ways. On one hand, you've got growth potential. I like andrewpmk's analogy in the sense that, imagine you're a US company operating in the US. Now, suddenly, there's like this whole other California [Canada] or New York State [Australia] [in terms of population] with similar or close to similar levels of GDP, and OMFG, they speak English too..!!
On the other hand though, they are *different* countries. Apple has achieved some phenomenal stuff with music licensing with iTunes Store. Cracking Europe+UK, and getting Australia and NewZealand in the mix.
Maybe in terms of music there's always been a flow around (dare I mention Kylie Minogue?? **ducks from Aussies hurling stuff at me**) of Australian, NZ, UK, US artists. For example, Wolfmother is from Sydney and they won a US Grammy for "Best Hard Rock"... http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...2/s1845609.htm
It is frustrating for users and clearly the bucket has big leaks in it, ie. P2P. I'm not sure what Apple needs to do but there is space for innovation here on how to approach and license media on a global scale, in the *most efficient* way. On top of this, remember all the telco negotiation with iPhone Apple has to do.
Hard to say how they're gonna do it, but the Pixar-Disney-Steve Jobs tie up is one way. Just say, hell, we'll be a media distributor ourselves.
Maybe Apple is hoarding a sh1tload of cash to prepare to --- wait for it --- start buying out media distribution and mobile operator companies. You read it here first.
Could this be something behind the new Apple, Inc. rebranding? And guess what, there's a lot of circumventing of monopoly laws available, since Apple will be buying different companies in different locales. Outside the EU and US trading blocs, individual countries are fair game.
Hoard up that cash, raise a bit more equity if needed, then start carpet bombing the acquisition market by buying up tv/film distributors and mobile phone operators.
I bet Steve would love to give all these "old media" owners and distributors a swift kick up the arse this way...!!!!11!!
Apple Computer was your friendly neighbourhood fruit company. Apple, Inc. might make Microsoft look like a bunch of hippies in the next decade or two.
I've said this a number of times before, but it bears repeating for those who don't seem to understand it (I don't mean you).
If Jobs could snap his fingers, and all around the world, simultaneously, Apple was able to sell every bit of content ever produced, on the terms that Apple would find to be appealing to its potential customers, he would do it.
People who complain that Apple is dragging its feet simply have no understanding of just how difficult, and expensive, it all is.
In the US, the home territory, it's tough enough. That's why Apple doesn't yet have thousands of music video's, thousands of tv shows, and thousands of movies.
If they were to give in to the content owners, and the royalty distributors, then those complaining about not enough programming being available, would instead be complaining about the price, and excessively restrictive DRM.
For Apple to open an internet store in another country, they first have to hire a local law firm, experienced in such entertainment matters. They then have to assign Apple personnel to work with that firm. They have to learn the relevant laws. They then have to contact the local music companies, as well as the multinationals they already deal with. They then have to contact the local royalty distributors.
Then they have to enter into negotiations with all of these groups, not all of whom agree on what, why, how, or when, not to mention "how much".
After months, (if they are lucky!) an agreement will be finalized. Then they have to do the actual work of getting the content digitalized for the iTunes store, the artwork digitalized and formatted, etc. Then the pricing of the individual albums, which are not standardized as the song prices are.
During all of this, they have to write the required localized software for the site, and set up the legal notices, etc. In order to do this, they will have had to hire the required programmers, those in countries with languages other than American English will have to be hired locally, so that the site can be done in the appropriate language, correctly.
There are other machinations as well, but this gives the idea of just how difficult it all is.
When the markets are small, those costs could represent such a large part of the costs of running the site, that profits might be impossible to come by. It may even result in a multi-year loss.
It also seems as though the smallest venues are the most difficult ones to deal with, and so take the longest.
Unless one has dealt with this, as I have, one just don't understand.
I wish Apple would start up its own media company. Signing bands to release iTunes exclusive music and creating TV shows to create iTunes exclusive video.
It would not only help to keep people interested in iTunes as there one stop shop for all things media but also increase revenue by not paying out the substantial fees to the record and televison studios.
With Jobs history of making Pixar into a great studio, I think Apple can do it with the other media too.
That won't happen, and I hope it won't happen.
There isn't a single reason why Apple should do that, and plenty of reasons why they shouldn't.
It's NEVER a good idea for a distributor to go into business in competition with its suppliers!
If you think Apple has a problem now in negotiations rights with content providers, that will be nothing, compared to the troubles they would have if they owned part of their supply.
I wish Apple would start up its own media company. Signing bands to release iTunes exclusive music and creating TV shows to create iTunes exclusive video.
NO!!!
Enough of the "exclusive" stuff. I don't want to have to buy an AppleTV to get 1/4 of my favourite shows and music, an xbox for another 1/4, a PS3, and GoogleBox... etc. Exclusivity is crap and I think we have to fight against that or we'll be in a terrible place in 10 years time.
I've said this a number of times before, but it bears repeating for those who don't seem to understand it (I don't mean you).
If Jobs could snap his fingers, and all around the world, simultaneously, Apple was able to sell every bit of content ever produced, on the terms that Apple would find to be appealing to its potential customers, he would do it.
People who complain that Apple is dragging its feet simply have no understanding of just how difficult, and expensive, it all is.
In the US, the home territory, it's tough enough. That's why Apple doesn't yet have thousands of music video's, thousands of tv shows, and thousands of movies.
If they were to give in to the content owners, and the royalty distributors, then those complaining about not enough programming being available, would instead be complaining about the price, and excessively restrictive DRM.
For Apple to open an internet store in another country, they first have to hire a local law firm, experienced in such entertainment matters. They then have to assign Apple personnel to work with that firm. They have to learn the relevant laws. They then have to contact the local music companies, as well as the multinationals they already deal with. They then have to contact the local royalty distributors.
Then they have to enter into negotiations with all of these groups, not all of whom agree on what, why, how, or when, not to mention "how much".
After months, (if they are lucky!) an agreement will be finalized. Then they have to do the actual work of getting the content digitalized for the iTunes store, the artwork digitalized and formatted, etc. Then the pricing of the individual albums, which are not standardized as the song prices are.
During all of this, they have to write the required localized software for the site, and set up the legal notices, etc. In order to do this, they will have had to hire the required programmers, those in countries with languages other than American English will have to be hired locally, so that the site can be done in the appropriate language, correctly.
There are other machinations as well, but this gives the idea of just how difficult it all is.
When the markets are small, those costs could represent such a large part of the costs of running the site, that profits might be impossible to come by. It may even result in a multi-year loss.
It also seems as though the smallest venues are the most difficult ones to deal with, and so take the longest.
Unless one has dealt with this, as I have, one just don't understand.
Yes, clearly this is the same (and sane) argument with regard to Apple being more agressive to grow market share, license OSX to beigeboxes, etc.
Of course, in any business, efficiency needs to be considered. Apple clearly has its eyes fixed on a certain level of profit margin, nett overall, after tax.
Yeah melgross, I understand you expressing frustration that people think what Jobs says, goes, no matter who or what one is dealing with.
Yeah, some of us have been in project management positions (however minor to super-complex stuff) and having to 1. source the targets, 2. negotiate payments/ licenses/ rights/ etc., and 3. get everyone on the same page, then 4. implement and 5. quality control re-iterative cycles. Not easy. But money talks. The key to negotiation is that old hackneyed word, win-win. Or, buy out the company and then beat them into submission. 8)
I think the reason why iTunes Stores for Music at least, breaks about even because just maintaining, sourcing, licensing, featuring music, it's all a lot of work for the Music Store, especially for each country.
Overall though, that's why I still think Steve is ready to take it to the next level. iPhone + global TV/Film/MusicVideo/Music distribution. DRM-free, if possible.
How Apple,Inc. is going to do this --while maintaining their profit growth-- will be truly one of the *greatest* innovations to come out of Cupertino. It will make Marklar [OSX on Intel past 5 years secret project], Dashboard, Spotlight and Expose seem like something a 3 year old dreamt up in a finger-painting session.
I truly believe this is next level is what Apple, Inc. is about, and what "30 years was just the beginning" really means.
Yes, clearly this is the same (and sane) argument with regard to Apple being more agressive to grow market share, license OSX to beigeboxes, etc.
Of course, in any business, efficiency needs to be considered. Apple clearly has its eyes fixed on a certain level of profit margin, nett overall, after tax.
Yeah melgross, I understand you expressing frustration that people think what Jobs says, goes, no matter who or what one is dealing with.
Yeah, some of us have been in project management positions (however minor to super-complex stuff) and having to 1. source the targets, 2. negotiate payments/ licenses/ rights/ etc., and 3. get everyone on the same page, then 4. implement and 5. quality control re-iterative cycles. Not easy. But money talks. The key to negotiation is that old hackneyed word, win-win. Or, buy out the company and then beat them into submission. 8)
I think the reason why iTunes Stores for Music at least, breaks about even because just maintaining, sourcing, licensing, featuring music, it's all a lot of work for the Music Store, especially for each country.
Overall though, that's why I still think Steve is ready to take it to the next level. iPhone + global TV/Film/MusicVideo/Music distribution. DRM-free, if possible.
How Apple,Inc. is going to do this --while maintaining their profit growth-- will be truly one of the *greatest* innovations to come out of Cupertino. It will make Marklar [OSX on Intel past 5 years secret project], Dashboard, Spotlight and Expose seem like something a 3 year old dreamt up in a finger-painting session.
I truly believe this is next level is what Apple, Inc. is about, and what "30 years was just the beginning" really means.
I can agree with that. The question is whether it can all be brought together.
After the music companies fell to Jobs' marketing pitch, and the Tv content providers had signed on, though with much less content, the movie providers have become much more wary. We don't, as yet, know just how that will work out.
I can't blame these companies for wanting to control their own distribution channels. They are properly alarmed over the prospect of Apple controlling so much of the consumer base that they will become supplicants over their own material.
While some might like that prospect, it wouldn't be good for us in the long run. no one company should ever have that power, and that's speaking as a stockhiolder.
Comments
I don't think it matters who is picking the tempo, but given that the average is going down and that the audience is stable at best, I can't help but think that those that pick the tempo end up doing so to the detriment for a wider interest in order to satisfy a small segment of their audience.
I'm not sure I get this Jeff. Are you saying the reason why Classical and Jazz has been dying as a recording classification is because all of the players in both genre's are playing slower?
Or are you putting me on?
Why not? I don't truly know if there is causation, but the correlation seems to be there. What I do know is that I'm not big on making music into a form of sleeping medicine, or paying for that treatment.
Well Jeff, I'm leaving this one alone, because I truly don't know what to say, and that's something!
iTunes and other online stores have no chance of defeating P2P if the television stations aren't willing to allow simultaneous broadcast outside the US so that iTunes can release TV shows simultaneously everywhere. In Canada, this isn't as much as a problem as in Australia since the Canadian TV stations simulcast most American material, but we still don't have TV or movies on iTunes. In Canada, P2P is still the only way to download TV shows. If CanCon/AussieCon laws get in the way of plans for TV broadcast, we can just skip TV distribution entirely and go straight to iTunes.
If I were Apple, I would be pushing very hard for global licenses from all the major studios and TV stations. I would also like to see some Canadian TV shows if a Canadian version comes out.
and how many in Australia? 30 million? Now, multiply that effort by 30, and come up with the costs to get the licenses, divided by the number of contents sold per capita. The costs are much higher.
There are only just 20 million of us now, past that make sometime last year.[/QUOTE]
Canada (where I live) has a population slightly smaller than the US state of California, and Australia has a population similar to that of Texas and New York State. Would Apple be willing to pull out of California (where its headquarters are located), New York or Texas? Don't think so. Therefore, Apple should pay as much attention to Canada and Australia as it does to California and New York. We are clearly not a small market.
There are only just 20 million of us now, past that make sometime last year.
Canada (where I live) has a population slightly smaller than the US state of California, and Australia has a population similar to that of Texas and New York State. Would Apple be willing to pull out of California (where its headquarters are located), New York or Texas? Don't think so. Therefore, Apple should pay as much attention to Canada and Australia as it does to California and New York. We are clearly not a small market.
Shows the problem these forums have with the way they drop previous posts.
That was from me.
I was giving the benefit of the doubt to the numbers.
It's not the same thing as being in one state in the US, where all of the rules are the same with licensing of content.
The costs are far more when setting up in a foreign jurisdiction. All negotiating must start from scratch. It's time consuming, and expensive. Laws are different as well. The cost of capital is different, etc.
There are 300 million people in the US. vs. 20 million there. It costs about the same to get the contracts finished and the store set up. Apple, and other companies, will take their time.
In this country there is legislation that dictates how much locally produced content has to be aired each week, (can't quite remeber the numbers at a the moment). So the local FTA networks, there are only 3, spend as little as possible on local content, in almost all cases it is reality tv or game shows.
The networks then spend the rest of the programming budgets on supposed news and current affairs (mostly just irritainment as someone earlier nicely quoted).
Most the rest of the programing money goes on American content.
If an FTA chaneel wants to buy say Lost, they negotiate deals that give them the rights to that one particualr show but also ties them into buying dozens of other BAD shows that that must also air or they do not get the rights the next time they are negotiated.
It's the same in Canada, where commercial TV is becoming more and more irrelevant. Fortunately, under Canadian law, Internet distribution is exempt from Canadian Content regulation from the CRTC (our TV, radio and communications regulator), so the American TV companies should consider direct-to-Internet distribution in Canada. Almost everyone in my university residence at University of Toronto uses P2P to download TV shows, so there is a big market.
...It's not the same thing as being in one state in the US, where all of the rules are the same with licensing of content.
The costs are far more when setting up in a foreign jurisdiction. All negotiating must start from scratch. It's time consuming, and expensive. Laws are different as well. The cost of capital is different, etc.
There are 300 million people in the US. vs. 20 million there. It costs about the same to get the contracts finished and the store set up. Apple, and other companies, will take their time.
Let's not even talk about Asia, including and excluding Japan. If y'all are interested, we've had some interesting discussion at http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=71507 ...
Yeah it cuts both ways. On one hand, you've got growth potential. I like andrewpmk's analogy in the sense that, imagine you're a US company operating in the US. Now, suddenly, there's like this whole other California [Canada] or New York State [Australia] [in terms of population] with similar or close to similar levels of GDP, and OMFG, they speak English too..!!
On the other hand though, they are *different* countries. Apple has achieved some phenomenal stuff with music licensing with iTunes Store. Cracking Europe+UK, and getting Australia and NewZealand in the mix.
Maybe in terms of music there's always been a flow around (dare I mention Kylie Minogue?? **ducks from Aussies hurling stuff at me**) of Australian, NZ, UK, US artists. For example, Wolfmother is from Sydney and they won a US Grammy for "Best Hard Rock"... http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...2/s1845609.htm
It is frustrating for users and clearly the bucket has big leaks in it, ie. P2P. I'm not sure what Apple needs to do but there is space for innovation here on how to approach and license media on a global scale, in the *most efficient* way. On top of this, remember all the telco negotiation with iPhone Apple has to do.
Hard to say how they're gonna do it, but the Pixar-Disney-Steve Jobs tie up is one way. Just say, hell, we'll be a media distributor ourselves.
Maybe Apple is hoarding a sh1tload of cash to prepare to --- wait for it --- start buying out media distribution and mobile operator companies.
Could this be something behind the new Apple, Inc. rebranding? And guess what, there's a lot of circumventing of monopoly laws available, since Apple will be buying different companies in different locales. Outside the EU and US trading blocs, individual countries are fair game.
Hoard up that cash, raise a bit more equity if needed, then start carpet bombing the acquisition market by buying up tv/film distributors and mobile phone operators.
I bet Steve would love to give all these "old media" owners and distributors a swift kick up the arse this way...!!!!11!!
Apple Computer was your friendly neighbourhood fruit company. Apple, Inc. might make Microsoft look like a bunch of hippies in the next decade or two.
Why do people keep saying this?
Ireland, you've been in enough discussions about this to know that it has little to do with what Apple wants to do.
It's all a matter of the broken licensing system, particularly outside of the US. At least here, we are a very large market, with one licensing system. Outside the US, Apple has to deal with dozens. Even in the so called "EU", there are many different systems to deal with. Many of those systems are much more restrictive in what they want. Apple has to negotiate with each one of them.
Then there is the whole DRM question. With a number of European countries talking about or envoloved in court challenges to DRM and Apple's Fair Play it might not be the best market to get into at the moment, and even if Apple wants to the Studio's might not want to until the courts are fully behind their rights to distribute DRM content.
In the US there is no serious legal challenge to DRM at the moment as far as I know, and if there were it would be taking on Apple for Fair Play and Microsoft for their latest WMP which limites DRM audio/video support to systems running Windows OS. WallMart, as well as all the movie studios and recording studios would proabably be pulled into it as well since the are going to be distribuiting content in the WMP format. Then there is going to be BlockBuster and NetFlix as well as anyone else who wants to try their hand at online rental distribution. This will be a daunting legal battle that probably wont happen in the pro buisness US, while it is a lot more likely in the Europe.
Of course it is all going to depend on the success in getting that content into the living room. AppleTV is going to have an advantage in their UI and well known distribution model, while the other side will have the advantage in the more flexible licensing schemes in WMP allowing both purchases and rentals.
If I were Apple, I would be pushing very hard for global licenses from all the major studios and TV stations. I would also like to see some Canadian TV shows if a Canadian version comes out.
I wish Apple would start up its own media company. Signing bands to release iTunes exclusive music and creating TV shows to create iTunes exclusive video.
It would not only help to keep people interested in iTunes as there one stop shop for all things media but also increase revenue by not paying out the substantial fees to the record and televison studios.
With Jobs history of making Pixar into a great studio, I think Apple can do it with the other media too.
It's the same in Canada, where commercial TV is becoming more and more irrelevant. Fortunately, under Canadian law, Internet distribution is exempt from Canadian Content regulation from the CRTC (our TV, radio and communications regulator), so the American TV companies should consider direct-to-Internet distribution in Canada. Almost everyone in my university residence at University of Toronto uses P2P to download TV shows, so there is a big market.
If that happened, the authorities, at the instigation of the Canadian media, would find some way to stop it.
Let's not even talk about Asia, including and excluding Japan. If y'all are interested, we've had some interesting discussion at http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=71507 ...
Yeah it cuts both ways. On one hand, you've got growth potential. I like andrewpmk's analogy in the sense that, imagine you're a US company operating in the US. Now, suddenly, there's like this whole other California [Canada] or New York State [Australia] [in terms of population] with similar or close to similar levels of GDP, and OMFG, they speak English too..!!
On the other hand though, they are *different* countries. Apple has achieved some phenomenal stuff with music licensing with iTunes Store. Cracking Europe+UK, and getting Australia and NewZealand in the mix.
Maybe in terms of music there's always been a flow around (dare I mention Kylie Minogue?? **ducks from Aussies hurling stuff at me**) of Australian, NZ, UK, US artists. For example, Wolfmother is from Sydney and they won a US Grammy for "Best Hard Rock"... http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...2/s1845609.htm
It is frustrating for users and clearly the bucket has big leaks in it, ie. P2P. I'm not sure what Apple needs to do but there is space for innovation here on how to approach and license media on a global scale, in the *most efficient* way. On top of this, remember all the telco negotiation with iPhone Apple has to do.
Hard to say how they're gonna do it, but the Pixar-Disney-Steve Jobs tie up is one way. Just say, hell, we'll be a media distributor ourselves.
Maybe Apple is hoarding a sh1tload of cash to prepare to --- wait for it --- start buying out media distribution and mobile operator companies.
Could this be something behind the new Apple, Inc. rebranding? And guess what, there's a lot of circumventing of monopoly laws available, since Apple will be buying different companies in different locales. Outside the EU and US trading blocs, individual countries are fair game.
Hoard up that cash, raise a bit more equity if needed, then start carpet bombing the acquisition market by buying up tv/film distributors and mobile phone operators.
I bet Steve would love to give all these "old media" owners and distributors a swift kick up the arse this way...!!!!11!!
Apple Computer was your friendly neighbourhood fruit company. Apple, Inc. might make Microsoft look like a bunch of hippies in the next decade or two.
I've said this a number of times before, but it bears repeating for those who don't seem to understand it (I don't mean you).
If Jobs could snap his fingers, and all around the world, simultaneously, Apple was able to sell every bit of content ever produced, on the terms that Apple would find to be appealing to its potential customers, he would do it.
People who complain that Apple is dragging its feet simply have no understanding of just how difficult, and expensive, it all is.
In the US, the home territory, it's tough enough. That's why Apple doesn't yet have thousands of music video's, thousands of tv shows, and thousands of movies.
If they were to give in to the content owners, and the royalty distributors, then those complaining about not enough programming being available, would instead be complaining about the price, and excessively restrictive DRM.
For Apple to open an internet store in another country, they first have to hire a local law firm, experienced in such entertainment matters. They then have to assign Apple personnel to work with that firm. They have to learn the relevant laws. They then have to contact the local music companies, as well as the multinationals they already deal with. They then have to contact the local royalty distributors.
Then they have to enter into negotiations with all of these groups, not all of whom agree on what, why, how, or when, not to mention "how much".
After months, (if they are lucky!) an agreement will be finalized. Then they have to do the actual work of getting the content digitalized for the iTunes store, the artwork digitalized and formatted, etc. Then the pricing of the individual albums, which are not standardized as the song prices are.
During all of this, they have to write the required localized software for the site, and set up the legal notices, etc. In order to do this, they will have had to hire the required programmers, those in countries with languages other than American English will have to be hired locally, so that the site can be done in the appropriate language, correctly.
There are other machinations as well, but this gives the idea of just how difficult it all is.
When the markets are small, those costs could represent such a large part of the costs of running the site, that profits might be impossible to come by. It may even result in a multi-year loss.
It also seems as though the smallest venues are the most difficult ones to deal with, and so take the longest.
Unless one has dealt with this, as I have, one just don't understand.
I wish Apple would start up its own media company. Signing bands to release iTunes exclusive music and creating TV shows to create iTunes exclusive video.
It would not only help to keep people interested in iTunes as there one stop shop for all things media but also increase revenue by not paying out the substantial fees to the record and televison studios.
With Jobs history of making Pixar into a great studio, I think Apple can do it with the other media too.
That won't happen, and I hope it won't happen.
There isn't a single reason why Apple should do that, and plenty of reasons why they shouldn't.
It's NEVER a good idea for a distributor to go into business in competition with its suppliers!
If you think Apple has a problem now in negotiations rights with content providers, that will be nothing, compared to the troubles they would have if they owned part of their supply.
I wish Apple would start up its own media company. Signing bands to release iTunes exclusive music and creating TV shows to create iTunes exclusive video.
NO!!!
Enough of the "exclusive" stuff. I don't want to have to buy an AppleTV to get 1/4 of my favourite shows and music, an xbox for another 1/4, a PS3, and GoogleBox... etc. Exclusivity is crap and I think we have to fight against that or we'll be in a terrible place in 10 years time.
I've said this a number of times before, but it bears repeating for those who don't seem to understand it (I don't mean you).
If Jobs could snap his fingers, and all around the world, simultaneously, Apple was able to sell every bit of content ever produced, on the terms that Apple would find to be appealing to its potential customers, he would do it.
People who complain that Apple is dragging its feet simply have no understanding of just how difficult, and expensive, it all is.
In the US, the home territory, it's tough enough. That's why Apple doesn't yet have thousands of music video's, thousands of tv shows, and thousands of movies.
If they were to give in to the content owners, and the royalty distributors, then those complaining about not enough programming being available, would instead be complaining about the price, and excessively restrictive DRM.
For Apple to open an internet store in another country, they first have to hire a local law firm, experienced in such entertainment matters. They then have to assign Apple personnel to work with that firm. They have to learn the relevant laws. They then have to contact the local music companies, as well as the multinationals they already deal with. They then have to contact the local royalty distributors.
Then they have to enter into negotiations with all of these groups, not all of whom agree on what, why, how, or when, not to mention "how much".
After months, (if they are lucky!) an agreement will be finalized. Then they have to do the actual work of getting the content digitalized for the iTunes store, the artwork digitalized and formatted, etc. Then the pricing of the individual albums, which are not standardized as the song prices are.
During all of this, they have to write the required localized software for the site, and set up the legal notices, etc. In order to do this, they will have had to hire the required programmers, those in countries with languages other than American English will have to be hired locally, so that the site can be done in the appropriate language, correctly.
There are other machinations as well, but this gives the idea of just how difficult it all is.
When the markets are small, those costs could represent such a large part of the costs of running the site, that profits might be impossible to come by. It may even result in a multi-year loss.
It also seems as though the smallest venues are the most difficult ones to deal with, and so take the longest.
Unless one has dealt with this, as I have, one just don't understand.
Yes, clearly this is the same (and sane) argument with regard to Apple being more agressive to grow market share, license OSX to beigeboxes, etc.
Of course, in any business, efficiency needs to be considered. Apple clearly has its eyes fixed on a certain level of profit margin, nett overall, after tax.
Yeah melgross, I understand you expressing frustration that people think what Jobs says, goes, no matter who or what one is dealing with.
Yeah, some of us have been in project management positions (however minor to super-complex stuff) and having to 1. source the targets, 2. negotiate payments/ licenses/ rights/ etc., and 3. get everyone on the same page, then 4. implement and 5. quality control re-iterative cycles. Not easy. But money talks. The key to negotiation is that old hackneyed word, win-win. Or, buy out the company and then beat them into submission. 8)
I think the reason why iTunes Stores for Music at least, breaks about even because just maintaining, sourcing, licensing, featuring music, it's all a lot of work for the Music Store, especially for each country.
Overall though, that's why I still think Steve is ready to take it to the next level. iPhone + global TV/Film/MusicVideo/Music distribution. DRM-free, if possible.
How Apple,Inc. is going to do this --while maintaining their profit growth-- will be truly one of the *greatest* innovations to come out of Cupertino. It will make Marklar [OSX on Intel past 5 years secret project], Dashboard, Spotlight and Expose seem like something a 3 year old dreamt up in a finger-painting session.
I truly believe this is next level is what Apple, Inc. is about, and what "30 years was just the beginning" really means.
Yes, clearly this is the same (and sane) argument with regard to Apple being more agressive to grow market share, license OSX to beigeboxes, etc.
Of course, in any business, efficiency needs to be considered. Apple clearly has its eyes fixed on a certain level of profit margin, nett overall, after tax.
Yeah melgross, I understand you expressing frustration that people think what Jobs says, goes, no matter who or what one is dealing with.
Yeah, some of us have been in project management positions (however minor to super-complex stuff) and having to 1. source the targets, 2. negotiate payments/ licenses/ rights/ etc., and 3. get everyone on the same page, then 4. implement and 5. quality control re-iterative cycles. Not easy. But money talks. The key to negotiation is that old hackneyed word, win-win. Or, buy out the company and then beat them into submission. 8)
I think the reason why iTunes Stores for Music at least, breaks about even because just maintaining, sourcing, licensing, featuring music, it's all a lot of work for the Music Store, especially for each country.
Overall though, that's why I still think Steve is ready to take it to the next level. iPhone + global TV/Film/MusicVideo/Music distribution. DRM-free, if possible.
How Apple,Inc. is going to do this --while maintaining their profit growth-- will be truly one of the *greatest* innovations to come out of Cupertino. It will make Marklar [OSX on Intel past 5 years secret project], Dashboard, Spotlight and Expose seem like something a 3 year old dreamt up in a finger-painting session.
I truly believe this is next level is what Apple, Inc. is about, and what "30 years was just the beginning" really means.
I can agree with that. The question is whether it can all be brought together.
After the music companies fell to Jobs' marketing pitch, and the Tv content providers had signed on, though with much less content, the movie providers have become much more wary. We don't, as yet, know just how that will work out.
I can't blame these companies for wanting to control their own distribution channels. They are properly alarmed over the prospect of Apple controlling so much of the consumer base that they will become supplicants over their own material.
While some might like that prospect, it wouldn't be good for us in the long run. no one company should ever have that power, and that's speaking as a stockhiolder.