I've always found it funny that NBC backed out of iTunes over pricing, yet they offered the episodes for FREE on their website.....
Hello? NBC? Are you there? If people were willing to pay $1.99 per episode and more for a whole season pass, why would you stop that revenue and rely totally on FREE content.
Looks like someone was trying to take the WHOLE cookie jar, were caught, got their hand slapped, jar taken from them, they went and pouted in the corner, spouted off to mom and dad that they were going to go make their own cookies, found out that they were too stupid and didn't even know how to turn on the oven, and now are coming back to the parents asking if they can grab a cookie from the jar but only if the parents control what cookies go in the jar and how many they [the kid] can take out.
NBC.... You'll put your shows back on iTunes, like it, sit there and shut up. Oh, and also pray that someone out there is stupid enough to hire this clown that you have put your trust in.
I've always found it funny that NBC backed out of iTunes over pricing, yet they offered the episodes for FREE on their website.....
Hello? NBC? Are you there? If people were willing to pay $1.99 per episode and more for a whole season pass, why would you stop that revenue and rely totally on FREE content.
While it's free to the customer, NBC still makes money from advertisements (which can't be skipped). Who knows if they're making $1.99 per view, but they're definitely not giving the views away for free, any more than they do with broadcast TV.
It seems tha.... HDTV/BluRay player for now so I don't know if every device will actually encrypt the signal via HDCP, but it is certainly possible.
Anyone else have more information?
Aside from the encryption issue, BluRay players seem to need to be updated regularly to keep up with the changes for the new movies. Every time they find out someone has broken the key, they change something. I'm not planning to buy BluRay until they sort this out. The BluRay players are special purpose computers that need regular updating via the net. Just what you need!
Over at Ars Technica their editors believe otherwise - that NBC wants total control over where and when you play your purchases, and what ads you must see when viewing them - just like you get from Hulu.
Dunno where they got that idea. At least it's not in the quoted text from George Kliavkoff.
Quote:
There's absolutely no logic to them wanting Apple to impose measures to block piracy using non-Apple software.
Dunno where you got the idea they want to use non-Apple software.
Quote:
The only thing Apple can control is content downloaded from their own servers.
Not if Apple would read other types of DRM (WMA) and implement DRM on all content in iTunes library. If no DRM is present, it wouldn't be allowed to go onto the iPod (at least via iTunes or something in the OS.)
Of course, you and I know that if Apple does that, the amount of purchases will immediately drop to be just as low as everybody else's.
As I read the article, it's about ALL content, not only iTunes purchases.
If someone RIP'd their own CD or had torrent files with no DRM, you couldn't transfer/use to the iPod/iTunes.
Face saving at its finest. I seriously doubt piracy is a real issue but NBC had to figure out an excuse to save face before crawling back to iTunes.
DUMMY, of course it is!!! They have some of the best TV shows on the air and, not I becuase I watch them on TV after they have been recorded by my DVR, but my friend never watches TV, downloads all of his TV shows via torrent, converts them for his Apple TV and iPod, takes those TV shows everywhere with him.
The studios are so desperate for an alternative to iTunes and Apple that they really go to unusual lengths to distance themselves.
The studios are so desperate for an alternative to Apple and iTunes that they will go to almost any length to arrive at an irrational decision which prevents adding both revenue and profit to their income statement. Is it really any surprise the GE's entertainment unit (NBC/Universal) was once again one the the under-performers in last quarter's results?
Who cares. I don't watch NBC broadcasts. I see little reason to care if I can put them on an iPod. It's been years since I heard of an NBC program that I'd want to watch.
The studios are so desperate for an alternative to Apple and iTunes that they will go to almost any length to arrive at an irrational decision which prevents adding both revenue and profit to their income statement. Is it really any surprise the GE's entertainment unit (NBC/Universal) was once again one the the under-performers in last quarter's results?
No surprise and it has been going on for quite a while. Unfortunately the current quarter debacle
was more about the failure of the much larger financial services component, so the poor
performance of the entertainment unit may escape notice (relatively).
Wasn't there a similar commotion after Steves open letter about dropping DRM ? ie studios say "that will never happen" ,"are you mad?" etc. and then Amazon opened
lots of arm flapping and looking at where the milk has dried on the floor.
I agree with the above post that Apple response should be total silence.
Wasn't there a similar commotion after Steves open letter about dropping DRM ? ie studios say "that will never happen" ,"are you mad?" etc. and then Amazon opened
lots of arm flapping and looking at where the milk has dried on the floor.
I agree with the above post that Apple response should be total silence.
Or maybe an announcement of a great new deal with another media company
I think Apple and iTunes is just fine without NBC/Universal, and the reality is that NBC needs Apple more than Apple needs NBC/Universal. Apple will never, ever go for this. They do not like being dictated to. Never mind that Apple's public stance has been LESS DRM not more. I know that I would dump iTunes in a New York minute if they instituted this scheme.
On another note while they seem to grasp the economics of pricing and market place. They do have a point, but unfortunately they will probably have a price floor that overprices their less popular content and overprice their popular content (does CD from an artist 40+ years ago need to cost $18?). But they obviously don't get the fact that some people will download content if it is free or near free but wouldn't pay for it anywhere what they think it is worth. The point being is that not every "pirate" download constitutes $$$. The problem is with people that WOULD pay for it and downloads it for nothing. But in my experience the people that will pay for it do through places like iTunes, and those that don't want to pay for it under no circumstances WON'T.
NBC/Universal needs to get a grip and realize that if anything they are hurting themselves. And their posturing will get them nowhere.
If you ask me, this is a sure early sign that Hulu isn't working, and NBC wants to come back to iTunes in the worst way. But they're trying to save face by attacking Apple again. <snip>
There's simply no way Steve will agree to any of it. Not the variable pricing, not the anti-piracy. None of it.
I believe Steve Jobs wants to define the next generation of television, just as he has been doing successfully with music. He made it simple in both technology and pricing - people started thinking differently about their music - not that the music companies have fully understood, and not that the step he made is the be-all and end-all of music (I suspect it'll take another generational step shortly).
Video has been much harder - iPod with video was a great start, but the AppleTV has stumbled. The content deals he pushed through with music haven't gone as well as they could have, partially because the networks want to retain complete control over their content.
(Unfortunately, even my wording of "retain control" shows my belief that they had control before.. perhaps they didn't. The amount of money they make on a show via FTA is directly related to how many people watch the show (ie the ratings of the show) and thus how much advertisers will pay for commercials in the show. At $2 per show on iTunes, the network still receives payment that's directly related to how many people watch the show.)
Steve Jobs is trying to balance several contradictory extremes of goals, and probably intends that in the end the networks make the same money as they did before. The networks want more money, not the same - and they probably don't really understand that holding onto their current systems is leading to less money (as users increasingly skip ads or download).
Although Apple is trying to create a viable economic model for TV programs, after the reactions of the networks I'd be surprised if Steve wasn't wondering whether they should just let iTunes (and iPods and AppleTV) take any and all formats available without negotiations and just focus on selling hardware -ie: record FTA (with ad skipping) and play any avi's.
Apple is not the problem, it's a solution to the problem.
Or maybe an announcement of a great new deal with another media company
Yes, interesting idea. Perhaps Apple needs to shake things up a bit more.
As I have in another thread... I'd suggest the following :-)
Apple announces that EVERY ABC TV show is now available on iTunes, and viewers have 3 choices for how they get it
1) buy it for $1.99
2) rent it for 80c (1 day)
3) watch it with 2 commercials per ad-break (instead of 8 or more!)
(ads can not be skipped, and are customised to the viewers location and interests).
ABC knows how much they earn per viewer now via advertising. So they need to make the same $$$ via #2 or via advertising in #3 above. Ads are worth MUCH more if there are fewer, better customised, and prevent skipping. (Part of their earnings from #2 or #3 would have to be redistributed to local ABC channels).
Even if you have a PVR already, would the above be appealing to you?
Clearly Apple is trusted by NBC to govern what we can have on our hard drives, lets have them put their money where their mouths are and start endorsing Steve Jobs for president and the Apple board for the Cabinet! Clearly NBC would be happier if Apple were big brother to all of us, let's make it official. Problem is, once Steve became president the first thing he would do is change the law to let everyone have access to any digital file at any time for a very reasonable fee, with a small tax thrown in to balance the Federal Budget. Now paying for Iraq, that's harder, we should sell it to the Chinese...
I can't believe NBC has people in charge of their on-line strategy who are this clueless. I'd be embarrassed as a company to have someone on my digital team this stupid.
I feel badly for Apple who has to conduct negotiations with these guys.
Apple: At $1.99 retail, your cut will be $1.50 per download.
NBC: Does that come with a Llama? Will it be purple?
It seems he suggests that all video is protected under licence agreements, if it isn't "home videos"... which is probably almost true most of the cases. Therefore he assumes that if a video without DRM is added to the library it's most sertainly pirated and should be reported. After all there is no official DVD/movie licence agreement that gives the user the right to convert its legally prchased DVD/movie into another format (which is crap anyway). And this is why Apple is working with including iTunes-friendly versions on the DVD's.. He's just whining. Such an approach wouldn't be good for anyone.
I remember Steve jobs' words when he introduced the iTunes store: "We want to compete with the pirates." Thats a much more healthy stance.
Comments
Hello? NBC? Are you there? If people were willing to pay $1.99 per episode and more for a whole season pass, why would you stop that revenue and rely totally on FREE content.
Looks like someone was trying to take the WHOLE cookie jar, were caught, got their hand slapped, jar taken from them, they went and pouted in the corner, spouted off to mom and dad that they were going to go make their own cookies, found out that they were too stupid and didn't even know how to turn on the oven, and now are coming back to the parents asking if they can grab a cookie from the jar but only if the parents control what cookies go in the jar and how many they [the kid] can take out.
NBC.... You'll put your shows back on iTunes, like it, sit there and shut up. Oh, and also pray that someone out there is stupid enough to hire this clown that you have put your trust in.
I've always found it funny that NBC backed out of iTunes over pricing, yet they offered the episodes for FREE on their website.....
Hello? NBC? Are you there? If people were willing to pay $1.99 per episode and more for a whole season pass, why would you stop that revenue and rely totally on FREE content.
While it's free to the customer, NBC still makes money from advertisements (which can't be skipped). Who knows if they're making $1.99 per view, but they're definitely not giving the views away for free, any more than they do with broadcast TV.
It seems tha.... HDTV/BluRay player for now so I don't know if every device will actually encrypt the signal via HDCP, but it is certainly possible.
Anyone else have more information?
Aside from the encryption issue, BluRay players seem to need to be updated regularly to keep up with the changes for the new movies. Every time they find out someone has broken the key, they change something. I'm not planning to buy BluRay until they sort this out. The BluRay players are special purpose computers that need regular updating via the net. Just what you need!
Over at Ars Technica their editors believe otherwise - that NBC wants total control over where and when you play your purchases, and what ads you must see when viewing them - just like you get from Hulu.
Dunno where they got that idea. At least it's not in the quoted text from George Kliavkoff.
There's absolutely no logic to them wanting Apple to impose measures to block piracy using non-Apple software.
Dunno where you got the idea they want to use non-Apple software.
The only thing Apple can control is content downloaded from their own servers.
Not if Apple would read other types of DRM (WMA) and implement DRM on all content in iTunes library. If no DRM is present, it wouldn't be allowed to go onto the iPod (at least via iTunes or something in the OS.)
Of course, you and I know that if Apple does that, the amount of purchases will immediately drop to be just as low as everybody else's.
As I read the article, it's about ALL content, not only iTunes purchases.
If someone RIP'd their own CD or had torrent files with no DRM, you couldn't transfer/use to the iPod/iTunes.
Very much Big Brother/1984.
Face saving at its finest. I seriously doubt piracy is a real issue but NBC had to figure out an excuse to save face before crawling back to iTunes.
DUMMY, of course it is!!! They have some of the best TV shows on the air and, not I becuase I watch them on TV after they have been recorded by my DVR, but my friend never watches TV, downloads all of his TV shows via torrent, converts them for his Apple TV and iPod, takes those TV shows everywhere with him.
The studios are so desperate for an alternative to iTunes and Apple that they really go to unusual lengths to distance themselves.
The studios are so desperate for an alternative to Apple and iTunes that they will go to almost any length to arrive at an irrational decision which prevents adding both revenue and profit to their income statement. Is it really any surprise the GE's entertainment unit (NBC/Universal) was once again one the the under-performers in last quarter's results?
The studios are so desperate for an alternative to Apple and iTunes that they will go to almost any length to arrive at an irrational decision which prevents adding both revenue and profit to their income statement. Is it really any surprise the GE's entertainment unit (NBC/Universal) was once again one the the under-performers in last quarter's results?
No surprise and it has been going on for quite a while. Unfortunately the current quarter debacle
was more about the failure of the much larger financial services component, so the poor
performance of the entertainment unit may escape notice (relatively).
lots of arm flapping and looking at where the milk has dried on the floor.
I agree with the above post that Apple response should be total silence.
Wasn't there a similar commotion after Steves open letter about dropping DRM ?
lots of arm flapping and looking at where the milk has dried on the floor.
I agree with the above post that Apple response should be total silence.
Or maybe an announcement of a great new deal with another media company
On another note while they seem to grasp the economics of pricing and market place. They do have a point, but unfortunately they will probably have a price floor that overprices their less popular content and overprice their popular content (does CD from an artist 40+ years ago need to cost $18?). But they obviously don't get the fact that some people will download content if it is free or near free but wouldn't pay for it anywhere what they think it is worth. The point being is that not every "pirate" download constitutes $$$. The problem is with people that WOULD pay for it and downloads it for nothing. But in my experience the people that will pay for it do through places like iTunes, and those that don't want to pay for it under no circumstances WON'T.
NBC/Universal needs to get a grip and realize that if anything they are hurting themselves. And their posturing will get them nowhere.
If you ask me, this is a sure early sign that Hulu isn't working, and NBC wants to come back to iTunes in the worst way. But they're trying to save face by attacking Apple again. <snip>
There's simply no way Steve will agree to any of it. Not the variable pricing, not the anti-piracy. None of it.
I believe Steve Jobs wants to define the next generation of television, just as he has been doing successfully with music. He made it simple in both technology and pricing - people started thinking differently about their music - not that the music companies have fully understood, and not that the step he made is the be-all and end-all of music (I suspect it'll take another generational step shortly).
Video has been much harder - iPod with video was a great start, but the AppleTV has stumbled. The content deals he pushed through with music haven't gone as well as they could have, partially because the networks want to retain complete control over their content.
(Unfortunately, even my wording of "retain control" shows my belief that they had control before.. perhaps they didn't. The amount of money they make on a show via FTA is directly related to how many people watch the show (ie the ratings of the show) and thus how much advertisers will pay for commercials in the show. At $2 per show on iTunes, the network still receives payment that's directly related to how many people watch the show.)
Steve Jobs is trying to balance several contradictory extremes of goals, and probably intends that in the end the networks make the same money as they did before. The networks want more money, not the same - and they probably don't really understand that holding onto their current systems is leading to less money (as users increasingly skip ads or download).
Although Apple is trying to create a viable economic model for TV programs, after the reactions of the networks I'd be surprised if Steve wasn't wondering whether they should just let iTunes (and iPods and AppleTV) take any and all formats available without negotiations and just focus on selling hardware -ie: record FTA (with ad skipping) and play any avi's.
Apple is not the problem, it's a solution to the problem.
Or maybe an announcement of a great new deal with another media company
Yes, interesting idea. Perhaps Apple needs to shake things up a bit more.
As I have in another thread... I'd suggest the following :-)
Apple announces that EVERY ABC TV show is now available on iTunes, and viewers have 3 choices for how they get it
1) buy it for $1.99
2) rent it for 80c (1 day)
3) watch it with 2 commercials per ad-break (instead of 8 or more!)
(ads can not be skipped, and are customised to the viewers location and interests).
ABC knows how much they earn per viewer now via advertising. So they need to make the same $$$ via #2 or via advertising in #3 above. Ads are worth MUCH more if there are fewer, better customised, and prevent skipping. (Part of their earnings from #2 or #3 would have to be redistributed to local ABC channels).
Even if you have a PVR already, would the above be appealing to you?
I feel badly for Apple who has to conduct negotiations with these guys.
Apple: At $1.99 retail, your cut will be $1.50 per download.
NBC: Does that come with a Llama? Will it be purple?
Apple: <sigh>
Apple: At $1.99 retail, your cut will be $1.50 per download.
NBC: Does that come with a Llama? Will it be purple?
Apple: <sigh>
hehehe
Yes. Coming from the same marketing people who think "if we double the speed of the credits we can fit an extra ad in the middle of the show".
That whole schpeal was absurd.
Not even close.
I remember Steve jobs' words when he introduced the iTunes store: "We want to compete with the pirates." Thats a much more healthy stance.