Apple Partnering with Inline Video Ad Company?

[MacRumors]

NewTeeVee claims that Apple has partnered with a small San Francisco-based video advertising startup named Podaddies. The extent of the deal appears to be developing advertising support for Apple's Quicktime and iTunes groups, and does not involve a direct financial investment.

Podaddies CEO claims that its technology is currently functioning on "connected iPod and iPhone devices" and is working on adding compatibility for disconnected devices. ("Connected" may refer to internet-connected like the iPod touch and iPhone.)

Previous reports have revealed that Apple has been exploring the possibility of in-line video advertising. In-line ads would be video advertisements that would play at the beginning, middle or end of the content itself. In previous discussion it had been suggested that this in-line advertising would presumably discount the cost of the media itself.

Ad supported media could also be add additional flexibility to Television and Movie distribution through the iTunes Store. NBC recently pulled out of the iTunes Store to launch their own ad-supported distribution. Meanwhile, Hulu is another major industry initiative to offer ad-supported content to consumers directly.

Article Link

[twoodcc]

i don't know about this. most people hate ads...

[kainjow]

If Apple is going to charge for content and add advertising, no thanks.

If they are going to distribute free content (movies) with advertising, no thanks.

Netflix is my prefer method for watching movies. And I cancelled my cable tv because advertising sucks. Oh and I use SafariBlock also

[offwidafairies]

I switch off when I see ads

[arn]

Originally Posted by twoodcc

i don't know about this. most people hate ads...

I think most people would watch/ignore ads-sponsored content over paying for it.

Would you rather download a TV episode for free with ads or pay $1.99 for it without ads? Because that's going to be a choice in the coming months. (if not from iTunes, then from NBC or Hulu)

arn

[Football1maniac]

What's there to hate about ads when you can fast forward through them? Last time I checked, every iPod with video has that capability.

[kainjow]

Originally Posted by Football1maniac

What's there to hate about ads when you can fast forward through them? Last time I checked, every iPod with video has that capability.

Not if they use some special DRM technique and updated firmware to recognize when an ad is playing and disable fast forwarding.

[offwidafairies]

Originally Posted by arn

I think most people would watch/ignore ads-sponsored content over paying for it.

Would you rather download a TV episode for free with ads or pay $1.99 for it without ads? Because that's going to be a choice in the coming months. (if not from iTunes, then from NBC or Hulu)

arn

i think id like the choice.
some days im scrooge, other days i feel like no interruptions

[tk421]

This story has almost all negative votes, but macpolls currently says differently.

[nbs2]

Considering that most TV shows, I watch once, I'd rather deal with a few seconds of ads (especially if they are concentrated at the beginning or end) rather than pay the $1.99.

My issue with the NBCDirect thing is that a) it will require a proprietary player using a DRM system that I'm not familiar with (and accompanied by what-else-I-don't-know) and b) that it is not going to be Mac compatible in the immediate future (and I don't know if PPC will ever be supported). Running the same system through iTS would be worth while.

I see it this way - I can get the free one, and if I like it that much, I'll pay to buy the ad free version. Heck, I'd do the same with artists that I'm trying out for the first time. A 30 second ad on the front end of an album that I'm testing - if I find that I get annoyed with it after a couple of listens, delete without worry. Would save me a fair bit of cash...

[nagromme]

There are time when I'm actually GLAD to have a video, website, game, etc. be free, supported by ads. (I watch LOST that way and am glad to have it.)

There are times when it's worth it to me to pay for ad-free content too. (I buy Galactica... at least until NBC bailed!)

I have no problem with both kinds of media existing. Free doesn't always mean bad.

And I see no reason to assume Apple would BOTH charge AND run ads. That sounds more like cable TV

[ifjake]

"reduced pricing" better mean "free".

I'm not against ad supported video, if it's free. I really don't like streaming video though. Downloading an episode (ads or not) from iTunes is usually if not always a better experience than having to stream from some website. However, it should only be lead in or lead out ads, with no interruptions in the middle.

[Small White Car]

Things I want to keep, I'll continue paying to keep ads out of it.

But when I miss an episode of some show and I just want to see it once and will never watch it again? Sure, I'd put up with ads to get it for free in that case.

[Rychy]

I'd put up with ads if the shows were free... probably buy an Apple TV as well.

[ariza910]

This was coming - Apple stands to make a ton of money from advertising (look at Google) and recent disagreements with NBC have most likely been over revenue sharing.

Apples claim that NBC was asking $5 per episode makes a lot more sense when you think of it in this advertising model - If Apple could pull in $7 per episode from advertising and only pay NBC $.99 wholesale thats a nice profit for Apple.

I would love to see an iTunes store that has two versions of each video, a free version with commercials and a pay version for $1.99 without commercials. Oh while they are at it bundle a HD AppleTV version and an iPod/iPhone version into a single purchase.

[gkarris]

I'd like the choice. For some shows, free with ads are okay since I'd probably only watch once or will eventually get the DVDs.

$1.99 without the ads for shows I'd like to keep...

[reallynotnick]

OMG, wait think of this, free tv-shows with ads all through your Apple TV in 720p (ok, little stretch maybe). You could pretty much cancel your tv service and just watch what ever the heck you wanted.

I still think you should be able to pay like $60 a month and get unlimited, without ad TV shows from Apple TV, but hey free with ads would be ok.

[Sandfleaz]

As a stockholder I like it!

As a user I don't like it!

(I guess that means I'm on the fence)

[Dybbuk]

I think those of you hoping for shows laced with ads for free may be disappointed. But I hope you're right.

[Thataboy]

This is excellent. I, for one, think it is preposterous to purchase (for permanent ownership) video content from iTunes. It looks great on an iPod or iPhone, but such viewing is transient. I want DVD quality at LEAST for repeated viewings on an HDTV. If inline ads = free video for my iPhone, then two thumbs up!

An iTunes video version of the flash-players on networks' websites would be excellent. Of course if one wants the option to spend $2 on a crappy quality version of a TV show, I guess they should have that option too

[Analog Kid]

Bad news. Apple has done well in the past by creating new paradigms, not by parroting existing models.

Maybe I'm an extreme case, but I'm finding I actually enjoy TV again now that I can watch it on DVD and iTunes. If iTunes goes to commercials, then I guess I'll have more free time on my hands.

I don't understand what the iTunes ad-supported model has over existing DVRs or on-demand services. Seems to me it guts iTMS of what differentiates it in the market.

[bluebomberman]

I don't understand what this means. Why do they need to make specific investments into a tech startup to insert ads? Does this mean that your copy of iTunes is going to phone home to a server somewhere with the number of times you've watched a specific ad in a show, or maybe just capture your play count? "Working on disconnected devices?" Huh?

We've been hearing for years about how Apple's going to insert ads within media or on the iTS front page, but it hasn't happened yet. I just don't think Apple will go down that road.

Someone clue me in?

[Fluffymuff]

Originally Posted by arn

Would you rather download a TV episode for free with ads or pay $1.99 for it without ads?

I'd rather pay $1.99 and watch it without ads than download it for free and watch it with ads.

[arn]

Originally Posted by bluebomberman

We've been hearing for years about how Apple's going to insert ads within media or on the iTS front page, but it hasn't happened yet. I just don't think Apple will go down that road.

Originally Posted by Fluffymuff

I'd rather pay $1.99 and watch it without ads than download it for free and watch it with ads.

They aren't mutually exclusive.

Now I don't know if this particular rumor is true... but it makes sense for Apple to look into it. Free ad-supported viewing is where a large push of the industry is going. It makes sense for Apple to explore the same model in a form that can also be downloaded to your iPod and iPhone.

Hulu:

Hulu will provide free, advertising-supported TV content--including full-episode programming--from NBC and News Corp.'s Fox, Fuel and Speed networks, as well as from nonequity partners including the Sundance Channel and independent cable channel Oxygen. It will also sell downloads of TV shows and movies.

Hulu's content most likely won't be playable on the iPod/iPhone. But it still will be appealing to iTunes users who would rather view shows once or twice without paying.

arn

[BTW]

Originally Posted by kainjow

If Apple is going to charge for content and add advertising, no thanks.

If they are going to distribute free content (movies) with advertising, no thanks.

Netflix is my prefer method for watching movies. And I cancelled my cable tv because advertising sucks. Oh and I use SafariBlock also

Yep Netflix is the best way to go. I'm getting The Office series off of Netflix. Sorry NBC!