PDA

View Full Version : Despite NBC's Return, Apple and NBC Still Disputing Claims




MacRumors
Sep 11, 2008, 08:07 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

At the "Let's Rock" media event, Steve Jobs announced that NBC had returned to iTunes after being absent from the online store for almost a year. The removal of NBC shows from iTunes was the result of a very public dispute between the the two companies.

Apple announced in August of 2007 (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/31/apple-to-stop-selling-nbc-television-shows/) that they would no longer be selling NBC television shows because NBC wanted "double the wholesale price" for each episode. NBC later disputed (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/09/01/nbc-disputes-apples-pricing-claims/) this claim by saying that they simply wanted flexible pricing. In the end, Apple and NBC were unable to come to an agreement until this week.

After Tuesday's announcement, NBC executives claimed (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10036785-93.html?tag=mncol;txt) that Apple had conceded to its demands about pricing and packaging shows together. NBC is now offering some catalog titles for $0.99 as well as package deals that could offer customers a bulk discount. Apple's Eddie Cue, however, has since denied (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10038173-93.html?tag=mncol) that these claims are true. According to Cue, lower prices have always been an option for networks."We've never told anyone they can't lower prices," Cue said.Cue also pointed out that the higher $2.99 price introduced on Tuesday is simply their standard price for High Definition content.




Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/09/11/despite-nbcs-return-apple-and-nbc-still-disputing-claims/)



mjstew33
Sep 11, 2008, 08:14 PM
I guess we'll see what happens.. I don't see NBC going anywhere, though. Apple wants them.

ryannel2003
Sep 11, 2008, 08:17 PM
Luckily for me, NBC has absolutely nothing interesting for me to watch. So they're disappearance months ago had no effect on me.

iSee
Sep 11, 2008, 08:23 PM
Oh, brother. They sound like a couple of 3rd graders.

zedsdead
Sep 11, 2008, 08:26 PM
Apple wants the content to be as cheap as possible. iTunes exists to sell Apple devices, not the other way around. I don't believe NBC on this.

alphaod
Sep 11, 2008, 08:26 PM
It should be cheap in the first place. The shows are free on TV already, just charge for the bandwidth and the missing ads which does not add up to $1.99 in the first place. $.99 is definitely more suitable.

MVApple
Sep 11, 2008, 08:30 PM
It should be cheap in the first place. The shows are free on TV already, just charge for the bandwidth and the missing ads which does not add up to $1.99 in the first place. $.99 is definitely more suitable.

I'm curious to see some of your math worked out :D

michaelsviews
Sep 11, 2008, 08:38 PM
Just more GREEDY exec's padding there retirement and estates.

I for one do NOT care if they pull the plug, they were NOT missed when they left before and there Hulu site is crap.

Go ahead leave, and your leaving is going to effect my Mac, iPhone, iPod how? Oh I cant watch your shows on them , hmmm with Cable and Satellite , oh and lets not forget p2p and the newsgroups.

Yea right you'll be a big loss.

Suck it up exec's and go polish your imitation leather chairs with your boney little ass's

Rocketman
Sep 11, 2008, 08:42 PM
. . . lower prices have always been an option for networks.

"We've never told anyone they can't lower prices,"

The app store shows that "free" apps are distributed at Apple's own expense to "support the platform".

Therefore I suggest NBC really spite Steve and offer all of their catalog of content ever broadcast for FREE.

Expose Apple to a bandwidth clog. The ultimate revenge!

I'm downloading the Bob Hope specials!

Rocketman

AvSRoCkCO1067
Sep 11, 2008, 08:44 PM
I'm pretty sure that Apple would never tell someone they COULDN'T lower their prices.

Every week their are loads of FREE TV shows on iTunes...that certainly seems like a lower price than $1.99 to me :p

dizastor
Sep 11, 2008, 09:03 PM
You can't fire me because I quit!
;)

Small White Car
Sep 11, 2008, 09:05 PM
Either one or the other is lying.

Based on everything I've seen over the last year, it's always been NBC that's making stuff up and Apple that's telling the truth.

Every single time.

Sun Baked
Sep 11, 2008, 09:07 PM
Oh, brother. They sound like a couple of 3rd graders.

Network fight, network fight ... oh oh watch out NBC's got the nunchucks.

twoodcc
Sep 11, 2008, 09:16 PM
this is just getting silly. why don't they just settle this for good

Clayne
Sep 11, 2008, 09:21 PM
dual? gun battle?

ariel
Sep 11, 2008, 09:25 PM
doesn't anyone at NBC realize that volume will bring more income? And volume comes with lower prices.

I watched the free HD version of "Life" thru iTunes and it is beautiful - much better than the SD version (both are free so you can check them both out). But i'll be damned if I'm gonna pay $2.99 for a 42 minute TV show regardless of the quality. Especially when i can see them for free on NBC's own site (with short commercials).

If the prices were $1 or $1.50, I'd be more likely to buy a whole season.

donga
Sep 11, 2008, 10:14 PM
i don't think we'll ever find out the truth until a tell all book or interview comes out years from now. for nbc: itunes is an incredible outlet for content = $$$$$$. for apple: nbc has content that people want to see and are willing to pay for = $$$$$$.

i'm glad they could see eye to eye on this

Rocketman
Sep 11, 2008, 10:32 PM
Either one or the other is lying.

Based on everything I've seen over the last year, it's always been NBC that's making stuff up and Apple that's telling the truth.

Every single time.

Interestingly it was NBC (MSNBC) that recently, under pressure, changed political ANCHORS (Oberman and Matthews) and replaced them with one of the few remaining somewhat neutral people they still have after the professional journalist defections.

One of those politically one-sided shows was replaced with the Rachel Maddow show (Air America), hence out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Rocketman

Small White Car
Sep 11, 2008, 10:44 PM
Interestingly it was NBC (MSNBC) that recently, under pressure, changed political ANCHORS (Oberman and Matthews) and replaced them with one of the few remaining somewhat neutral people they still have after the professional journalist defections.

One of those politically one-sided shows was replaced with the Rachel Maddow show (Air America), hence out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Rocketman

I fail to see how that's "interesting" since it's a completely separate part of the company which has absolutely nothing to do with this.

Does Bill O'Reilly have anything to do with the new Wolverine movie? They both work for Fox, but somehow I doubt it.

heyjp
Sep 11, 2008, 11:01 PM
Apple and NBC need to grow up and talk about their customers, not each other.

Jim

DennisSc
Sep 11, 2008, 11:35 PM
Yes, and speaking as a customer I'm especially grateful as my DVR chose not to record the season closer of the "The Office" this year and I'm not sure if it's still on Hulu....

Rot'nApple
Sep 11, 2008, 11:36 PM
I fail to see how that's "interesting" since it's a completely separate part of the company which has absolutely nothing to do with this.

NBC News Election Coverage = FAIL
NBC Digital Entertainment Distribution Division = FAIL

What's the commonality?

NBC! :rolleyes:

mdriftmeyer
Sep 11, 2008, 11:58 PM
The app store shows that "free" apps are distributed at Apple's own expense to "support the platform".

Therefore I suggest NBC really spite Steve and offer all of their catalog of content ever broadcast for FREE.

Expose Apple to a bandwidth clog. The ultimate revenge!

I'm downloading the Bob Hope specials!

Rocketman

Seeing as Apple has a large investment in Akamai I'd imagine they'd welcome the extra traffic and demand.

caliguy
Sep 11, 2008, 11:59 PM
NBC News Election Coverage = FAIL
NBC Digital Entertainment Distribution Division = FAIL

What's the commonality?

NBC! :rolleyes:

Err... the Olympics were pretty good I thought. NBC offered a crapload of HD channels to cover it (at least with DirecTV).

Doctor Q
Sep 12, 2008, 12:06 AM
Who needs the Olympics? We can watch Apple spokespeople and NBC spokespeople battle it out for the gold medal PR victory!

Trajectory
Sep 12, 2008, 12:41 AM
NBC tried to sell it's own online content for something like $4.99 per episode after first parting ways with Apple/iTunes. Looks like NBC's plan didn't work out so well.

Loge
Sep 12, 2008, 02:05 AM
The other part of the dispute, if I recall, was that NBC were not happy with the level of DRM for the shows.

How did that work out for them?

hobophobik
Sep 12, 2008, 06:09 AM
Apple wants the content to be as cheap as possible. iTunes exists to sell Apple devices, not the other way around. I don't believe NBC on this.

I always saw it the other way around.. I thought Apple devices existed to sell iTunes content. I always imagined they make most of their money out of iTunes nowadays, although please correct me if I'm wrong.

ATimson
Sep 12, 2008, 07:42 AM
It should be cheap in the first place. The shows are free on TV already, just charge for the bandwidth and the missing ads which does not add up to $1.99 in the first place. $.99 is definitely more suitable.
Don't forget the credit card companies' cut too. If Apple hasn't worked out a special deal, they're probably making about $0.40 on that $0.99 or $1.99 purchase.

slughead
Sep 12, 2008, 10:00 AM
Uh, apple did lose... wtf, did nobody else realize that all NBC wanted was to package some titles and reduce the price on others?

That was my understanding from the beginning. I guess Apple gave in, finally.

They package titles to force users to buy more than they want (ie, spend more money).. this may have given rise to Apple's half-truth "they wanted to double prices!!" Yeah, they wanted prices to be twice as high on package deals than single purchases, but they also wanted them to include more. That's like a car dealer switching from honda to corvette and someone complaining "HEY! THEY DOUBLED PRICES" (that's right, yet another car analogy... muaha).

Cue also pointed out that the higher $2.99 price introduced on Tuesday is simply their standard price for High Definition content.

What the hell kind of excuse is that? "oh, it's our standard price"... uh was this the same Apple that said they "never told anyone they wouldn't allow lower prices" ? I'm absolutely 100% positive studios would love selling some of their HD content for less than $3. People like HD better, and it can boost demand on some of these crappy shows. People watch HD even when the programming sucks, just because the picture is good (<- Proven fact)

ATimson
Sep 12, 2008, 10:19 AM
Uh, apple did lose... wtf, did nobody else realize that all NBC wanted was to package some titles and reduce the price on others?

That was my understanding from the beginning.
Those were NBC's claims from the beginning. Personally, I was somewhat skeptical, especially given that they were trying to develop their own content source at the time.

slughead
Sep 12, 2008, 10:46 AM
Those were NBC's claims from the beginning. Personally, I was somewhat skeptical, especially given that they were trying to develop their own content source at the time.

If that wasn't the case, why didn't Apple just publicly say "Okay, fine, we'll accept the NBC deal for packages for some and lower prices on others"

If NBC wasn't really after that, then they would've been screwed--they would've had to accept or admit that they wanted more than what they claimed publicly. Instead, Apple lied and said that NBC wanted to universally double prices (or implied that, at least). Of course that doesn't even make sense.

samab
Sep 12, 2008, 11:22 AM
Those were NBC's claims from the beginning. Personally, I was somewhat skeptical, especially given that they were trying to develop their own content source at the time.

You don't see music studios able to sell old songs for 49 cents on itunes.

Apple has a long history with its fight with the music studios on the 99 cent single pricing. History is on NBC's side of the claim.

ATimson
Sep 12, 2008, 12:09 PM
If that wasn't the case, why didn't Apple just publicly say "Okay, fine, we'll accept the NBC deal for packages for some and lower prices on others"
They could have said that, but if Apple was correctly representing the state of affairs, no such deal was ever offered; in that case, there's nothing to publicly say that they accept.

You don't see music studios able to sell old songs for 49 cents on itunes.
I don't see them asking for cuts, either, just increases.

Peruchito
Sep 12, 2008, 12:15 PM
I always saw it the other way around.. I thought Apple devices existed to sell iTunes content. I always imagined they make most of their money out of iTunes nowadays, although please correct me if I'm wrong.

you are wrong, but its a common misconception. itunes store is there only to support the sales of ipods. back when it first came out, this was the plan. thats why, just like the app store, the charge minimal prices, with most of the profits going to the music companies, the rest to run itunes.

when you here that itunes have sold $X million worth in songs, they are usually stating revenue, not profit. after all expenses, minus money that goes to the music companies, it is unclear/unannounced how much they really make, if anything. (if anyone has that info, it would be great)

samab
Sep 12, 2008, 01:44 PM
I don't see them asking for cuts, either, just increases.

Music studios have been asking for cheaper pricing for older songs for a long time.

http://www.forbes.com/2005/11/16/apple-emi-itunes-cx_pak_1116autofacescan08.html

ATimson
Sep 12, 2008, 02:03 PM
Music studios have been asking for cheaper pricing for older songs for a long time.

http://www.forbes.com/2005/11/16/apple-emi-itunes-cx_pak_1116autofacescan08.html
Ah. I was only aware of the other half of that equation. :) I do wonder how many major labels would avail themselves of that without the ability to charge more for other songs, though.

Rot'nApple
Sep 12, 2008, 02:05 PM
NBC.... what else is there left to say (shaking head)

milo
Sep 12, 2008, 03:50 PM
Apple wants the content to be as cheap as possible. iTunes exists to sell Apple devices, not the other way around. I don't believe NBC on this.

I don't think anyone believes NBC on this, particularly when the new deal doesn't include any of the things NBC was asking for when they left.

slughead
Sep 12, 2008, 06:36 PM
Ah. I was only aware of the other half of that equation. :) I do wonder how many major labels would avail themselves of that without the ability to charge more for other songs, though.

A lot.

Higher prices don't always mean higher profit. If you make 50% profit off each song, and dropping the price 20% can increase sales 30%, you make more profit at the lower price.

Actually, in this case, dropping the price even as little as 10% can have a huge increase in sales. Therefore, I don't see Apple's motive for keeping prices static--in some cases, it's better for customer and reseller to lower prices. I'm glad NBC forced them to rethink this policy.

ATimson
Sep 12, 2008, 07:13 PM
Higher prices don't always mean higher profit. If you make 50% profit off each song, and dropping the price 20% can increase sales 30%, you make more profit at the lower price.
And yet they're still trying to MSRP CDs at $15 or $18 apiece, when they could drop that to $10 or less and a) still make more profit per unit than they were a decade ago, and b) probably increase their net income in the process from increased sales.

No, record companies seem to be concerned with making the most amount of money per unit possible, with little or no concern for increasing their overall profit.

slughead
Sep 14, 2008, 04:10 PM
No, record companies seem to be concerned with making the most amount of money per unit possible, with little or no concern for increasing their overall profit.

A company has no concern for overall profit....

....
...

Well, uh... I have no idea what to say here. You think you know more about running a business than a multi-million dollar staff of experienced, educated people... are you like 16 or something?