TV Networks Continuing to Resist Apple's Effort to Slash iTunes Pricing

OK all of you, get out there and show support for this.

The internet is the wave of the future.

s.

They won't replace cable until they can get live sports. Selling the Superbowl post-game for $3 was great, but won't fly in 99% of households. I would've happily paid $3 for a live stream onto my AppleTV, though.

i really think its a matter of finding the sweet spot on pricing, If shows were cheap enough or subscription based, i would have alot more willingness to buy all my shows on itunes, or honestly i wouldnt mind an "ad version" to be free for download, i can tolerate adds for cheap to free download of my shows

I hope they see sense and go for this. At the moment my main reason for not buying from iTunes is that it is simply cheaper to buy DVD's and handbrake them.

1$ for every episodes... I'll start buying (or event renting) as long as it's the HD version

Anytime I search for a show that I like on iTunes it never seems to be there, like Dexter or UFC. Because I'm in the UK and I like to stay up-to-date it's not a far stretch to imagine I get my entertainment from less legitimate sources. I'd happily pay a small fee something I like form iTunes. But, if you put the price up too high, for what really is just a 50minute show, I'll just get it for free as usual.

It's the greed of these big networks that's holding them back from making peace with a large segment of savvy entertainment consumers. They can make Big profits by selling shows at 99cents over iTunes.

Dropped TimeWarner almost two years ago. Used DirecTV for a year but, when they decided to raise my $42/month to $64/month, I shipped back their box and put an antenna on my roof. I now get HDTV and, admittedly, only about 6 channels. However, I really don't miss it (and use my AppleTV to get some free news and commentary shows from the iTunes store).

$30/month for a "pre-packaged set" of TV shows doesn't sound very appealing to me. 90% of the channels I had with TimeWarner and DirecTV were worthless.

Frankly, I'd rather see the networks offer free, advertising-sponsored TV shows (something like what Hulu does) but give them to me on iTunes so I can watch on my TV, not my computer screen. Seems to me they've tried everything else -but- this. I know there's the issue of how to insert local advertising in the appropriate places but, given that ones IP address reveals ones location, this shouldn't really be such a difficult thing. Frankly, I don't mind the commercials if that pays for my TV.

I am more than willing to pay $0.99 a show for kids programming. When the price drops I will buy 25 shows that day.

Hopefully ...

Hopefully the networks realize that people will pay for programming if that programming is worth it. The market works ... as their history shows with the current business model. If a show works, then it stays on.

The "pay for what you want to watch" model is a good thing compared to the current model of paying for everything even if you don't watch it.

I would love $1 Shows.
And I love a subscription based service.
But. Only if they can show some actual support for the UK iTunes Store. I mean, it's crap.

Apple really needs to get better US Content for the UK. I don't want things like Skins or Shameless... I want NCIS and things.

Ah well !

I have a two year old and at the most I spend about $5 to $10, in new episodes each month. She watches the shows over and over so there is no need to spend $30 per month on a subscription. I do wish that shows were cheaper but I doubt I would be buying more.. Although I would tempted to get some of the HD shows.. such as the new Mickey Mouse Clubhouse episode.

-Low quality streaming with ads, free. Limited offer, most 5 recent episodes.
-High Quality download, and piped (too stream during download for instant access) with no ads, and any episode on any season, 99c.

Problem solved?

I can watch quite a few TV shows the same week they air on TV on Comcast on demand for free. That doesn't hurt the network affiliates? iTunes should offer the same deal, because even at 99 cents it's cheaper for me to watch the same show on TV.

The deals with affiliates aren't that lucrative. The networks pay the affiliates-not the other way around(yet). The money comes from advertisers, who can just as easily have their ad in the internet version.

The real issue is that the networks want to own the internet revenue and not get locked into a deal with Apple. The are still trying to find a way to capitalize from the content on the Internet themselves. Enter the NBC-Comcast deal, and the fact that NBC/Comcast/Hulu will be the same entity.

I think the TV companies might also be holding on to DVD sales. I've seen many older TV shows that I watch take forever to finish getting all of the seasons on iTunes, for seemingly no good reason. It almost seems as though the first couple of seasons were released on iTunes as teasers to attract people to buy DVDs, which is annoying.

Thanatoast said:

They won't replace cable until they can get live sports. Selling the Superbowl post-game for $3 was great, but won't fly in 99% of households. I would've happily paid $3 for a live stream onto my AppleTV, though.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Most people want to own movies as well as rent and own maybe their favorite series seasons but for the most part not that many people want to own tv shows and the hdd space that takes up. Especially when HD formats are larger and cost more but that's what we get on TV.

I for one watch enough live sports content that getting rid of satellite is not an option and with a DVR I'm still catching up on new episodes from last fall.

Paying for TV shows gets a laugh out of me. It's similar to paying for books.

But the networks do not want to ignore the 125 million customers with credit cards who have iTunes accounts, either.

Click to expand...

Maybe they should recognize that lots of those 125m customers do not actually access the US Itunes store, the TV shows are currently largely unavailable for the huge part of Itunes customers. But maybe they don't even know that a world exists outside the US?

kirky29 said:

I would love $1 Shows.
And I love a subscription based service.
But. Only if they can show some actual support for the UK iTunes Store. I mean, it's crap.

Apple really needs to get better US Content for the UK. I don't want things like Skins or Shameless... I want NCIS and things.

Ah well !

Click to expand...

I'm sure if Apple had it their way, you'd have basically unlimted access to whatever show you want, so you'd be buying it. So maybe apple isn't the only one to blame here. And not to say I'm faithfully blind when it comes to Apple, but I don't blame hulu for not having CBS shows in America either. CBS jus isn't willing to change their business model.

until there's a way for me to download shows for free since I already paid for the show by paying for cable, I don't care.

resistance is futile!

SteveSparks said:

I am more than willing to pay $0.99 a show for kids programming. When the price drops I will buy 25 shows that day.

Click to expand...

Today is that day. Get out your credit card.

I don't get why they are so butt hurt about this. Apple is opening up a NEW revenue stream for them that didn't exists before the iPad and iTunes.

I think copyright owners should set prices on all media. It becomes a decision what revenue and volume to get based on pricing. People that opt not to pay $1.99 for a TV episode might simply defer the purchase to when they are more solvent. Having fire sale prices all the time lowers overall revenue.

Having a monthly subscription is a good idea and has shown to work for the cellular model where tower growth was crippled for years and now bandwidth is. X $ per month for X minutes. I would subscribe to iTunes video content on that basis since I don't watch much "must see TV".

Internet radio and live feed video (couple of minute store-forward) in HD and actual live at 480p, would be practical over broadband.

Rocketman