Amazon not releasing app for Apple TV - partial refund of Prime membership

[Rigby]

I don't understand Amazon's reluctance for Apple TV if Amazon already has iOS apps for Video

The difference is that mobile access is just a complementary service, while the living room is where all those content delivery services compete for the future. Amazon wants to be able to not just play back, but also sell their content on streaming platforms, which is currently not economically feasible due to Apple demanding a 30% cut of everything sold through an app on Apple TV.

Amazon should be neutral

Why do people demand "neutrality" from Amazon but not Apple? Amazon has apps on a number of streaming devices by other manufacturers (Roku, smart TVs etc.), while Apple does not allow access to iTunes on anything but Apple devices.

 

[spacemnspiff]

The difference is that mobile access is just a complementary service, while the living room is where all those content delivery services compete for the future. Amazon wants to be able to not just play back, but also sell their content on streaming platforms, which is currently not economically feasible due to Apple demanding a 30% cut of everything sold through an app on Apple TV.

I don't quite follow, maybe I am being dense. Can you spell out the difference between streaming to an iPhone and to an Apple TV, in terms of revenue that Apple would collect, under the assumption that I don't sign up for any services through the Apple TV Amazon Video app or the app store?

For those who are interested in the copy of my chat, here it is. It might be worth a laugh for some. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/29783524/Amazon_chat_transcript_steve.pdf

 

[StayPuft]

I don't quite follow, maybe I am being dense. Can you spell out the difference between streaming to an iPhone and to an Apple TV, in terms of revenue that Apple would collect, under the assumption that I don't sign up for any services through the Apple TV Amazon Video app or the app store?

For those who are interested in the copy of my chat, here it is. It might be worth a laugh for some. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/29783524/Amazon_chat_transcript_steve.pdf

That sounds exactly how I would address the issue. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

 

[Rigby]

I don't quite follow, maybe I am being dense. Can you spell out the difference between streaming to an iPhone and to an Apple TV, in terms of revenue that Apple would collect, under the assumption that I don't sign up for any services through the Apple TV Amazon Video app or the app store?

The latter is exactly the point, although this is not just about the Prime subscription. Amazon wants you to be able to rent and buy individual movies and TV shows directly in the app. Going through an external web page creates what is called "friction" in the business, putting Amazon at a competitive disadvantage compared to one-click solutions available on the platform (like in this case iTunes). Note that you can rent/buy movies in Amazon's Roku app (which does not require a cut as high as Apple's).

 

[spacemnspiff]

The latter is exactly the point, although this is not just about the Prime subscription. Amazon wants you to be able to rent and buy individual movies and TV shows directly in the app. Going through an external web page creates what is called "friction" in the business, putting Amazon at a competitive disadvantage compared to one-click solutions available on the platform (like in this case iTunes). Note that you can rent/buy movies in Amazon's Roku app (which does not require a cut as high as Apple's).

I think we need to separate the problem in two steps. First, as a paying customer of Prime Video, I should be able to access my subscribed content on the platform that I choose, and this at the moment is possible on the iPhone but not Apple TV. So Amazon should create an app to support this part and not have to pay Apple anything to have this app.
Second, if Amazon wants to monetize on it's paid library in the app, then it has two choices there, Amazon can eat the Apple fee or pass that fee on to customers for the library content.

But there seems more at play here than just the above points, Amazon doesn't sell Apple TV on their site, in the false hope that customers will choose Amazon's product instead. And Amazon doesn't appreciate the competition that Apple offers and let's customers decide for themselves what product to support.

My sole reason for asking for a refund was that I feel Amazon is purposely acting against Prime subscribers by not allowing them to access their rightful paid content on the Apple TV, regardless of second part of the issue as described above.

This would be analogous to Netflix not supporting Apple TV just because they don't need to, they already have an iPhone app and thus can ask customers to Airplay from their iPhone app instead. This would not fly.
When I pay the Netflix subscription fee, my expectation is for them to support for my choice of streaming device.

 

[Rigby]

But there seems more at play here than just the above points, Amazon doesn't sell Apple TV on their site, in the false hope that customers will choose Amazon's product instead. And Amazon doesn't appreciate the competition that Apple offers and let's customers decide for themselves what product to support.

This is a very one-sided view IMO. After all, Apple doesn't allow access to iTunes on anybody else's devices, and doesn't sell Amazon boxes in their store either. Both of them are not exactly supporting open competition. Of the major streaming platforms, Roku is by far the most open (it has everything except iTunes).

This would be analogous to Netflix not supporting Apple TV just because they don't need to, they already have an iPhone app and thus can ask customers to Airplay from their iPhone app instead. This would not fly.
When I pay the Netflix subscription fee, my expectation is for them to support for my choice of streaming device.

I could just as well say that I expect to be able to play iTunes movies on the device of my choice. But I can't. Netflix is obviously different because they don't have a platform of their own.

 

[d21mike]

I think Amazon is a bit unique with these comparisons. The problem is they BUNDLE Prime Video/Music/Books with FREE 2 Day Shipping. If you only want FREE 2 Day Shipping you have to "pay" for Prime Video which you can't fully benefit from if you use an Apple TV.

Remember not too long ago 2 Day Shipping for $79 and not it is $99. A big part of that cost is Prime Video. Just compare that with the cost of Netflix.

Amazon needs to reduce the cost of Prime if you do not want Prime Video etc.

 

[robotica]

The reason Amazon won't make the app is that Apple won't make an Apple TV app for Amazon's platform.

 

[i hate phones]

This is a very one-sided view IMO. After all, Apple doesn't allow access to iTunes on anybody else's devices, and doesn't sell Amazon boxes in their store either. Both of them are not exactly supporting open competition. Of the major streaming platforms, Roku is by far the most open (it has everything except iTunes).
I could just as well say that I expect to be able to play iTunes movies on the device of my choice. But I can't. Netflix is obviously different because they don't have a platform of their own.

I don't think comparing Prime Video to iTunes is a fair comparison. iTunes is a store, not a subscription service. Amazon has a Prime video app on iOS that lets you watch stuff that's available through Prime but does not let you purchase/rent anything else (which would be the comparison to iTunes). Apple has made apple music available on other platforms...

 

[Rigby]

I don't think comparing Prime Video to iTunes is a fair comparison. iTunes is a store, not a subscription service.

Amazon video also includes a store in addition to the subscription service (which is more limited in terms of content selection). The Amazon Roku app, for example, supports both.

Amazon has a Prime video app on iOS that lets you watch stuff that's available through Prime but does not let you purchase/rent anything else (which would be the comparison to iTunes). Apple has made apple music available on other platforms...

As discussed above, mobile devices are a different segment. And Apple Music is available on exactly one other platform, and that is not a streaming device as discussed in this thread.

 

[2010mini]

The difference is that mobile access is just a complementary service, while the living room is where all those content delivery services compete for the future. Amazon wants to be able to not just play back, but also sell their content on streaming platforms, which is currently not economically feasible due to Apple demanding a 30% cut of everything sold through an app on Apple TV.
Why do people demand "neutrality" from Amazon but not Apple? Amazon has apps on a number of streaming devices by other manufacturers (Roku, smart TVs etc.), while Apple does not allow access to iTunes on anything but Apple devices.

It's actually 15% now.

 

[i hate phones]

Amazon video also includes a store in addition to the subscriptions service.

Yes I know, but my point is you're comparing an apple and an orange to just an apple. There is no apple comparison to Amazon Prime, what you can compare is the rest of Amazon's library to iTunes, neither of which are available on each other's platforms. And why is it different on Mobile? why is amazon ok with not allowing you to rent/buy stuff on their prime video app on iOS but they wouldn't be ok doing that on an apple TV?

 

[Rigby]

It's actually 15% now.

As far as I know that is only for subscriptions after one year. If you rent or buy individual digital items such as movies through an app, Apple still takes the usual 30%.

 

[Snoopy4]

I've given up on this and Vudu, but both air drop and work fine. It is what it is, but it would be nice to just have an app on AppleTV. I've found using the phone as the source to be rather handy as it uses wifi data for it. Ultimately you're dropping an authorized IP address to the ATV and from what I can tell it streams right to it. I have yet to experience any playback issues.

I may just get an iPad mini to use as my source device. It's easier to use it to flip though iTunes than it is on the ATV. Hit play and air drop and it just spins up the file on the ATV.

 

[Rigby]

Yes I know, but my point is you're comparing an apple and an orange to just an apple. There is no apple comparison to Amazon Prime, what you can compare is the rest of Amazon's library to iTunes, neither of which are available on each other's platforms.

I don't see what bearing any of this has on the point at hand. The fact is that the OP was demanding "non-discriminatory" treatment from Amazon, while actually Amazon's service is available on more platforms than Apple's. I have no dog in this fight, but Apple fans blaming Amazon for being closed platform is a bit rich. Each of these companies want to promote their own ecosystem, that's all there is to it. If you want an open platform, buy a Roku (and do without iTunes).

And why is it different on Mobile? why is amazon ok with not allowing you to rent/buy stuff on their prime video app on iOS but they wouldn't be ok doing that on an apple TV?

That was explained earlier.

 

[2010mini]

As far as I know that is only for subscriptions after one year. If you rent or buy individual digital items such as movies through an app, Apple still takes the usual 30%.

That was before. Then in a bid to entice streaming providers to support the TV app, they reduced it.

 

[Rigby]

That was before. Then in a bid to entice streaming providers to support the TV app, they reduced it.

Can you provide a source for them reducing the cut for non-subscription items? Thanks.

 

[ButteryScrollin]

Thanks, OP. I will give this a go with Amazon tomorrow.

 

[thesaint024]

I don't see what bearing any of this has on the point at hand. The fact is that the OP was demanding "non-discriminatory" treatment from Amazon, while actually Amazon's service is available on more platforms than Apple's. I have no dog in this fight, but Apple fans blaming Amazon for being closed platform is a bit rich. Each of these companies want to promote their own ecosystem, that's all there is to it. If you want an open platform, buy a Roku (and do without iTunes).

Preach. That is the irony in this thread. Anyway, this Amazon/Apple/Netflix/Roku pissing match isn't going to get resolved anytime soon from what I can tell. I now use a Roku for all of my content aside from iTunes. I know Amazon and Netflix are the big ones, but I also have content on Vudu and HBO. Roku also has some of my video library on a usb drive.

Point is, I only need to use my ATV for iTunes now because it is such a closed system. If they really want this cable cutting ATV revolution to happen, Apple is going to have to sweeten the deal for the content providers. The onus is on Apple to do this if they want to be competitive with Roku in this space. That new ATV app is going to be useless without Amazon and Netflix for me and I'm sure most others. I'm sure Roku will have something similar, and it will suck more, but I'll use it because I care about content more than a nice interface. This is all on Apple.

 

[spacemnspiff]

The fact is that the OP was demanding "non-discriminatory" treatment from Amazon, while actually Amazon's service is available on more platforms than Apple's. I have no dog in this fight, but Apple fans blaming Amazon for being closed platform is a bit rich.

That is exactly the point, Amazon's Prime Video subscription service is available on lot of platforms with the 'deliberate exception' of Apple TV.

The comparison of Amazon Prime Video subscription and iTunes is not relevant, because iTunes is a video store where you can buy and rent videos, Prime Video is a subscription service, when I say that I am ignoring the video store marketplace that Amazon has, that marketplace is a separate business. There are things about iTunes service that I don't agree with, but that's not the point I am making.

The validity of my point is limited to the Prime Video 'subscription service', I pay for it and I need Apple TV to be supported because I pay for it.

The closes analog to the Amazon's subscription service is Netflix, and Netflix takes initiative and usually is the first in developing apps for seemingly even the most insignificant platforms. I think Amazon is being stubborn just to be stubborn, there is no plausible reason for it.
If Amazon wants to club the video store and the subscription service together, that's a different problem altogether, seems like they don't agree to Apple's terms for the video store transactions, so one option would be keep the video store service out of the subscription service.

 

[2010mini]

That is exactly the point, Amazon's Prime Video subscription service is available on lot of platforms with the 'deliberate exception' of Apple TV.

The comparison of Amazon Prime Video subscription and iTunes is not relevant, because iTunes is a video store where you can buy and rent videos, Prime Video is a subscription service, when I say that I am ignoring the video store marketplace that Amazon has, that marketplace is a separate business. There are things about iTunes service that I don't agree with, but that's not the point I am making.

The validity of my point is limited to the Prime Video 'subscription service', I pay for it and I need Apple TV to be supported because I pay for it.

The closes analog to the Amazon's subscription service is Netflix, and Netflix takes initiative and usually is the first in developing apps for seemingly even the most insignificant platforms. I think Amazon is being stubborn just to be stubborn, there is no plausible reason for it.
If Amazon wants to club the video store and the subscription service together, that's a different problem altogether, seems like they don't agree to Apple's terms for the video store transactions, so one option would be keep the video store service out of the subscription service.

I agree. And to top it off Amazon blocks even private sales of Apple TVs. How a private seller offering ATVs negatively affects Amazon's bottom line really needs to be explained to me.

 

[nostresshere]

I get all the issues with Amazon and Apple stuff.

But this crap about getting a discount on Prime is ridiculous. (thread title)

I would expect a very high percent of customers have prime for one reason - 2 day shipping. None of them use the video stuff and do not expect a partial refund. The cost is the cost.

My Directv has about 50 channels I never watch - no discountI bought a car last year but do not use the sunroof - no discount. I bought a meal last week that came with some veggies that I did not eat - no discount. I bought a christmas light set with a stand included that I did not use - no discount. . My iphone has lots of features I will never use - no discount.

Buy something or don't. It is up to you.

 

[jdag]

I would expect a very high percent of customers have prime for one reason - 2 day shipping. None of them use the video stuff and do not expect a partial refund. The cost is the cost.

Completely! To go a step further, I would expect a very high percentage of customers that have Prime to have absolutely no idea that there is even the possibility of video streaming!

 

[nostresshere]

Completely! To go a step further, I would expect a very high percentage of customers that have Prime to have absolutely no idea that there is even the possibility of video streaming!

Yep - and using the OP rationale, then all those millions of people should get credit every year. Really??

 

[tanfan]

That is exactly the point, Amazon's Prime Video subscription service is available on lot of platforms with the 'deliberate exception' of Apple TV.

The comparison of Amazon Prime Video subscription and iTunes is not relevant, because iTunes is a video store where you can buy and rent videos, Prime Video is a subscription service, when I say that I am ignoring the video store marketplace that Amazon has, that marketplace is a separate business. There are things about iTunes service that I don't agree with, but that's not the point I am making.

The validity of my point is limited to the Prime Video 'subscription service', I pay for it and I need Apple TV to be supported because I pay for it.

The closes analog to the Amazon's subscription service is Netflix, and Netflix takes initiative and usually is the first in developing apps for seemingly even the most insignificant platforms. I think Amazon is being stubborn just to be stubborn, there is no plausible reason for it.
If Amazon wants to club the video store and the subscription service together, that's a different problem altogether, seems like they don't agree to Apple's terms for the video store transactions, so one option would be keep the video store service out of the subscription service.

Amazon video is more itunes like than Netflix. I only access on Roku but it is all there ..it's not sales and rentals here...and prime video in another app. It would be the same if Apple decided to start a subscription service within itunes. Something tells me if they did that, it would still be available on Apple tv only....Amazon video is available in a lot of places...