Amazon Wants 'Acceptable Business Terms' to Offer Prime Video on Apple TV

[paulrbeers]

I realize these are Apple Forums, but I dumped my AppleTV's for FireTV's and FireTV Sticks partly because of the lack of a Prime App. And the Echo is wayyy better at home automation than Siri is. My kids have Fire Tablets (kids additions). While not perfect, for $80 with a 2 year break warranty, its practically a no brainer for them.

We record all of our OTA with a TabloTV and then use the app on the FireTV (which yes there is now an Apple App, but seeing as how it would have cost us $750 (when the go onsale for about $125 each) to buy 6 AppleTV 4's instead of the $300 I paid for 3 FireTV's and 3 FireTV Sticks during Black Friday).

We've gone from an all Apple to a mostly Amazon household over the last year. Only my wife and I continue to use iPhones and iPads.

I've even dropped Pandora for the Amazon Music Streaming service (that comes free with Prime) and switched to the Amazon Cloud Music instead of Apple's Match service so all our 25K+ songs are available in the same app as a music service.

Oh and my kids love Tumbleleaf (an Amazon original kids show).

 

[Rogifan]

I think it's answered in this post...

The 30% cut seems acceptable for the app store but is always going to cause problems when applied to subscription services where the profit margins are already fairly tight.

So people can't pull out their phone, tablet or PC and order things there? Why does it matter whether the browser is available on TV or not? And anyway, who would want to use a web browser on a TV?

Do you feel that Apple should get 30% of any sale that's made from said app within Apple TV?

That seems to be part of the sticking point. It isn't as simple as Amazon won't let you you use it everywhere you want...it's that Apple wants a significant cut to let them do it.

I'll never understand how consumers, even if they are Apple fans, will blindly defend a 30% Apple tax on things like monthly subscriptions or in-app purchases for content delivered through multiple sources.

If they can have an app for iPad they can have an app for TV. Not difficult for someone to pull up a web browser on their computer, tablet or phone to purchase stuff.

 

[obiwan]

This. It's ridiculous that Apple (or any app store) wants a piece of what others sell inside their apps, at least for videos.



Or maybe you should be boycotting Apple.

You'd think that making hundreds of billions of dollars from hardware would be enough.

It's their greed that prevents banks from signing up for Apple Pay, and Amazon from fully supporting iOS.

If Apple really cared about its customers, it'd put their needs first.

Yeah but, it would be like a retail shop allowing competing businesses to have their products appear in their own shop window, for free without getting anything in return. The lure of the App store for developers is getting their App distributed though Apple's App store model, with zero (or very little) marketing costs to a huge customer base.

In theory, by Amazon Prime distributing their Amazon Video app through the AppleTV app store, this potentially opens up a huge market of would-be subscribers. I don't see that this is any different from their current iOS app though. Does the 30% only apply to AppleTV apps, but the current iPad/iPhone app is free?

It sounds like a bit of smoke screen to me, that Amazon really want to push their own hardware as a vehicle to Amazon prime video, rather than promote AppleTV. Almost trying to play Apple at their own game.

 

[orbital~debris]

It's fair to say that Amazon is the dominant marketplace at this point.

Apart from, you know, that small outfit called Alibaba

http://www.forbes.com/sites/walterl...-worldwide-leader-in-e-commerce/#6bc73fd32393

 

[Rogifan]

So if Apple wanted to put iTunes and Apple Music apps on the Fire TV Amazon wouldn't have any issues with that? Also they have a streaming only app on Xbox, why can't they do the same for TV and Chromecast?

 

[Wakey87433]

What "acceptable business terms" do they currently get on iOS (where the app is available now) that are not currently available to them on tvOS?

The iOS version launched when Amazon wasn't really taking their video service seriously, it was little more than a hobby. Video sales and rentals are now a much more important part of their service and they can't really afford to lose 30% on those as they only make 30%. Also with the stand alone video service they are clearly going after people who maybe don't use Amazon that much so wouldn't go for prime but might signup on a streaming device for the service and looking 30% or adding 30% extra on the cost isn't ideal.

I also suspect part of the hold up if the AppleTV two tier app system. When they launched the FireTV they made a big deal about their open platform where as long as it was deemed legal any app could be on the App Store and any app developer could use the voice search. Apples system while now fairly open at the store level is still invite only on the advanced features like Siri and global search. If they launch with a basic app you would feel they lose their single bargaining chip.

I also suspect that ideally they would be fine just having a limited app on AppleTV but it undermines Amazons main battle and Apple have just got caught in the crossfire. That main battle seems to be with Google and specifically with Android. Obviously FireOS is a Android fork with the main reason going the fork route being they can cut out a lot of the unnecessary elements to make it run quicker and can also simplify the interface for their 'less technical inclined' target audience without having to go down the skinning route that causes so many issues and performance hits on the phone front but that gives them a problem in that Google won't licence play services to forks. Without play services they have no way of hooking into various features including cast as its in the play services. Even if they would licence it There would be an issue because the licence terms also require all Google services are baked in even if the device would have little use for them (gmail, chrome and the office apps for example wouldn't be a major benefit on a streaming box for example) so they end up being both a space and a performance bloat. I think Amazon would actually like it if there was an open API outside of play services for certain features just as they have on IOS for things like Cast so they can build it into their devices without confusing their consumers who don't have the understanding to know they can't buy a fire tablet and expect to use it with a Chromecast because the Chromecast claims to have Prime support

 

[OllyW]

So people can't pull out their phone, tablet or PC and order things there? Why does it matter whether the browser is available on TV or not? And anyway, who would want to use a web browser on a TV?

I think people want to do it all from one place hence the complaints about the Amazon app being missing from their Apple TVs. Why can't they just Airplay it from their phone, tablet or PC?

 

[neuropsychguy]

People actually use the Prime video?

I do, regularly.

 

[aced411]

Apart from, you know, that small outfit called Alibaba

http://www.forbes.com/sites/walterl...-worldwide-leader-in-e-commerce/#6bc73fd32393

Oh you mean that online commerce company from Communist China? Good luck with that

 

[Tech198]

sounds like Amazon wants to be like Apple...

I thought Apple was the only one that was limited....... this space is becoming crowded... There is only room for one company and that be Apple.

Kind of like "accept my terms or you'll be the only device on the planet without Amazon Prime."

 

[Wakey87433]

Trust me, Jeff. We're not confused. We just want Prime on AppleTV.

I have Prime for the shipping, but I would never pay for it for streaming unless it were on Apple TV.

Are the people here an Average customer of Amazon though. The average Amazon customer isn't really that techy, it's part of the reason for their Fire line of products as they are designed to bring people who wouldn't normally buy that kind of product into the market place because they trust Amazon and Amazon make it seem less complex than many others while also having a price point that makes it worth a punt (Apple are obviously good at designing easy to use systems but their price point makes them a purchase that you have to know you want the device rather than it being more a impulse buy)

 

[Porco]

So if Apple wanted to put iTunes and Apple Music apps on the Fire TV Amazon wouldn't have any issues with that?

Presumably not, no. Because they don't have a problem with a Netflix app, or numerous other 'competing' services. The difference is, they wouldn't be asking Apple for 30% of everything they sell through their app like Apple want.

I'm on Amazon's side on this one. They want to have the prime app on every device going, why wouldn't they? They just don't want Apple making 30% from all their sales of content, when no-one else does.

Can you imagine Apple would be happy to pay Amazon 30% of everything they sell through their app and iTunes stores if they were on FireTV? No? So why should Amazon be happy to do that?

30% on the sale of an app or for in-app purchases that are relying on Apple's ecosystem make sense. 30% on sales that are through an app for stuff available elsewhere regardless of the app makes no sense at all, and is actually making selling on AppleTV unattractive, because it cuts profits for no discernable benefit over all the other options. It's bad for Prime customers too, because it means less money to invest in exclusive programming, because it'd be going to Apple instead.

 

[NATO]

The iOS version launched when Amazon wasn't really taking their video service seriously, it was little more than a hobby. Video sales and rentals are now a much more important part of their service and they can't really afford to lose 30% on those as they only make 30%. Also with the stand alone video service they are clearly going after people who maybe don't use Amazon that much so wouldn't go for prime but might signup on a streaming device for the service and looking 30% or adding 30% extra on the cost isn't ideal.

I also suspect part of the hold up if the AppleTV two tier app system. When they launched the FireTV they made a big deal about their open platform where as long as it was deemed legal any app could be on the App Store and any app developer could use the voice search. Apples system while now fairly open at the store level is still invite only on the advanced features like Siri and global search. If they launch with a basic app you would feel they lose their single bargaining chip.

I also suspect that ideally they would be fine just having a limited app on AppleTV but it undermines Amazons main battle and Apple have just got caught in the crossfire. That main battle seems to be with Google and specifically with Android. Obviously FireOS is a Android fork with the main reason going the fork route being they can cut out a lot of the unnecessary elements to make it run quicker and can also simplify the interface for their 'less technical inclined' target audience without having to go down the skinning route that causes so many issues and performance hits on the phone front but that gives them a problem in that Google won't licence play services to forks. Without play services they have no way of hooking into various features including cast as its in the play services. Even if they would licence it There would be an issue because the licence terms also require all Google services are baked in even if the device would have little use for them (gmail, chrome and the office apps for example wouldn't be a major benefit on a streaming box for example) so they end up being both a space and a performance bloat. I think Amazon would actually like it if there was an open API outside of play services for certain features just as they have on IOS for things like Cast so they can build it into their devices without confusing their consumers who don't have the understanding to know they can't buy a fire tablet and expect to use it with a Chromecast because the Chromecast claims to have Prime support

I think you're spot on here - I think this might be a calculated move from Amazon for two reasons:

1. By not having a quality Amazon Prime Video app on Apple TV, it makes the Apple TV look worse (to those who want Amazon content as well as Netflix and other providers) and in turn raise demand for their own devices like the Amazon Fire TV (or Fire TV Stick), particularly since the Amazon devices place their own content prominently on the home screen.
2. Having to give Apple 30% means that if Amazon DID decide to offer an Apple TV app, it would just offer the free Prime content and not give Amazon the potential revenue for selling rentals or movie sales on top of the prime offering.

I know for me I had been holding on to the previous generation Apple TV but as they aged badly, our household abandoned the Apple TVs for Amazon Fire TV devices (as did a few friends funnily enough for similar reasons). I think Apple were also a bit late to the game, having held on with the Apple TV 3 for so long while the competition caught up and then surpassed it. Amazon I think are clearly capitalising on this.

 

[Wakey87433]

Well I guess he's right that some consumers are stupid, but Apple TV users are already used to having to sign in with an existing account or with having to jump on their computer to type in a code. Nobody with an Apple TV would be phased by that. It's the norm.

I do think Apple charging 30% in perpetuity for subscription sign ups is a bit rich, so I see where he's coming from there. I also understand it becomes an Amazon customer service nightmare to charge customers more if they sign up on their Apple TV (like Spotify did on their iOS apps) compared to signing up on their computer. Apple really needs to be a bit more reasonable with that. Make it 30% of the first transaction only or something.

In any case, I guess now we know for sure it's not coming any time soon

It's the purchases and rentals where it's a bigger issue. The charge completly wipes out the revenue the marketplace makes on digital content and that is a more profitable area for firms than the subscription model as subscription services ultimately don't turn a profit at the current price point as its too low for the cost to aquire content.

 

[dannys1]

I get Amazon Prime Video for free as part of my Prime subscription. I've still not bothered to watch anything on it yet in over a year and I don't really ever plan to.

 

[RickInHouston]

The Prime video service on Android is still kind of weird last I checked. They market it as Amazon Underground because it needs side loaded or some crap. After picking up Amazon Underground App Store (from Amazons website) you can pick up the video streaming app.

Nothing official on Google Play at all.

If you want it, there is a way of officially way of getting it. You have to go through Amazon's android app store, is all. Nothing to difficult for an android user to figure out.

 

[Rogifan]

Presumably not, no. Because they don't have a problem with a Netflix app, or numerous other 'competing' services. The difference is, they wouldn't be asking Apple for 30% of everything they sell through their app like Apple want.

I'm on Amazon's side on this one. They want to have the prime app on every device going, why wouldn't they? They just don't want Apple making 30% from all their sales of content, when no-one else does.

Can you imagine Apple would be happy to pay Amazon 30% of everything they sell through their app and iTunes stores if they were on FireTV? No? So why should Amazon be happy to do that?

30% on the sale of an app or for in-app purchases that are relying on Apple's ecosystem make sense. 30% on sales that are through an app for stuff available elsewhere regardless of the app makes no sense at all, and is actually making selling on AppleTV unattractive, because it cuts profits for no discernable benefit over all the other options. It's bad for Prime customers too, because it means less money to invest in exclusive programming, because it'd be going to Apple instead.

Yet they have no problem with an app for iPad. Amazon could make a streaming only app like they do for Xbox. If someone wants to buy content they do it outside of the app.

 

[Wakey87433]

None. This is a BS statement by Bezos. He knows that the second Prime Video is available on TvOS his Fire players are dead in the water.

From the Prime video front he wouldn't mind if the Fire Devices die as they make no profit on them. The only issue for him is the rental/purchase market.

And let's be honest AppleTV wouldn't kill the FireTV market just as the iPad doesn't kill the Fire Tablets. They aren't after all bad pieces of hardware and they are largely aimed at a different market to Apples market so there will always be an audience for them. I like my AppleTV4 but I have more FireTV productsnaroundnthe house as they are more cost effective. The ATV after all costs more and is lower speced than the FireTV box and the stick can do basically everything that the ATV can outside play content bought via iTunes

 

[Chupa Chupa]

I think it's answered in this post...

The 30% cut seems acceptable for the app store but is always going to cause problems when applied to subscription services where the profit margins are already fairly tight.

Thanks for pointing that out. Amazon's position makes sense to me now and completely changes my opinion 180 degrees. I doubt this will be fixed anytime soon as It looks like Apple is purposely trying to box Amazon out (no pun) because it wants to become a media distribution company the likes of Amazon. As an Apple fan and Prime subscriber I think Prime wins unless it tapers down it's free offerings. Lately they have been expanding. Personally I think Apple should stick to making great hardware and leave the content to other companies.

 

[orbital~debris]

Oh you mean that online commerce company from Communist China? Good luck with that

Hopefully you're not another who thinks the planet revolves around America.

I'm not sure how the societal/governance background is relevant when Alibaba is "the dominant marketplace" - given their sales.
From the article:
"Sales for 2014 [were] estimated at $420 Billion. In 2012 sales were $170 Billion. This dwarfs Amazon, its closest competitor…"

 

[forgotmyhandle]

I always stream Amazon prime video from the iOS app to my Apple TV.

One of the reasons I have the old Apple TV.

I have done this occasionally with the latest AppleTV.

 

[gadgetguy03]

Can't really understand how customers could expect that every piece of tech they buy from Amazon includes the Prime app, and then get disappointed and return it if not.

Judging by that quote, Bezos loves watching Buffy episodes on his Nest Thermostat...

 

[kdarling]

So people can't pull out their phone, tablet or PC and order things there? Why does it matter whether the browser is available on TV or not? And anyway, who would want to use a web browser on a TV?

Rog, you must be joking. Or you live alone

There's no way in heck that my non-techie wife, my 90 year old mother, or my younger grandkids are going to go dig up another device (even if they knew how) just to request a certain movie or TV show.

On Amazon on Roku, they just click on it. On Apple TV, they'd have to go find a laptop or desktop, start a browser, log into Amazon, "buy" the video and put it in their bought list, then go back to the room with the ATV.

Totally ridiculous user experience, and no it's not the same thing as the kludge you can do on an iPad.

Yeah but, it would be like a retail shop allowing competing businesses to have their products appear in their own shop window, for free without getting anything in return.

I think it's more like someone selling a TV set, and then wanting a piece of every cable movie you order to view on it.

 

[VeryVito]

I always stream Amazon prime video from the iOS app to my Apple TV.

One of the reasons I have the old Apple TV.

Which is what makes Bezo's answer such crap. Amazon offers the Prime app on every iOS device, but requires a sub-par experience for anyone wanting to watch it on the wide screen. Unfortunately, Amazon's original programming hasn't been inspiring enough to warrant adding another useless devices to my AV setup at this point (Alpha House was fantastic, but they seem to have let it die on the vine, so... good luck to them).

 

[ksnell]

Or, you know, they could release the app so us paying customers can use Amazon Prime on whatever device we choose. I understand the desire for good business terms but this is hurting their customers/market share by keeping this up.