Apple Clashing With Publishers Over Subscription News Service

[MacRumors]

Apple is having trouble negotiating financial terms with publishers for its planned subscription news service, reports The Wall Street Journal.

Said to be like "Netflix for news," the planned subscription news service is designed to let users read unlimited content from participating publishers for one monthly fee, set at about $10 per month.

Major publishers are said to be resisting Apple's proposed revenue split, which would provide Apple with half of the revenue from the service. The other half of the revenue would be split among publishers "according to the amount of time users spend engaged with their articles."

Apple does not want to provide credit card information or email addresses to publishers, details that news sites use to create customer databases and market their products.

The New York Times and the Washington Post, two major publications with paywalls and subscription offerings, have not inked deals with Apple because of concerns over the terms at the current time. The Wall Street Journal reportedly also has concerns, but its conversations with Apple have been described as "productive."

Most sites charge $9.99 or more per month for access to their articles. The New York Times prices its basic subscriptions at $15 per month, while The Washington Post charges $10 per month and The Wall Street Journal charges $39 per month. Providing subscriptions through Apple could cause current subscribers to swap over, leading to lower revenue.

All three sites already offer some content on Apple News and are allowed to offer up subscriptions. News organizations are able to keep 70 percent of subscription fees for the first year for customers who sign up for Apple News, while Apple keeps 30 percent. After a year, Apple's cut drops to 15 percent.

Apple is planning to launch the subscription news service later this year as a paid option in the Apple News app. Other rumors have suggested that Apple is also planning to provide access to a number of popular magazines for $9.99 per month as it incorporates its Texture acquisition into Apple News.

It's possible that the one $9.99 per month fee would include access to both news content and magazines, though these could also be separate payments.

With the news service, and a planned television service that's also coming in 2019, Apple is aiming to boost its overall services revenue. With flagging iPhone sales, services has become an increasingly important category for Apple, allowing the company to generate revenue from its huge active install base.

Apple has discussed bundling its news service with iCloud storage tiers and its television service, so an all-in-one package from Apple could be on the horizon.

Article Link: Apple Clashing With Publishers Over Subscription News Service

 

[BJMRamage]

fingers crossed Flipboard won't start a subscription-only service.

 

[yaxomoxay]

I am very disappointed by what online news has become - independently of the politics. 99% is clickbait, with preliminary, unverified, information and very little insights. I honestly prefer to spend $40 to $60/month for the home delivery of two or three printed newspapers (Financial Times, WSJ, local paper). I found out that I am way more informed than the average person and have a better understanding of what's relevant or not. (printed papers have to save space, while online media has to produce more!). And I am way less stressed!
Bottom line: I don't think I'd pay for this service, and news organization should provide better news.

 

[magicschoolbus]

I can't trust anything Apple puts out for news - their bias has been shown by their CEO's virtue signaling while they remain silent on human rights issues in China and censor their apps and services in other countries.

 

[apolloa]

This is business 101 isn’t it? Basic things, like you don’t stop your own profitable services, then choose to make less money selling through a third party AND be prepared to give said third party, (Apple), 50% of your sales earnings...

It’s not rocket science to see why they are telling Apple NO?

 

[calzon65]

How fast information dissemination continues to change and the arm wrestling as to who holds the ultimate power.

 

[ghanwani]

99% is clickbait

This is especially true with paywalls. They create catchy headlines and show enough of the article to pique one's interest, but once you get the article, it is usually uninteresting.

 

[falainber]

So, Apple wants to aggregate a bunch of news services which each charge $10 per month. Apple also wants the combined subscription to cost $10 and $5 from it would go to Apple. I think it makes perfect sense. Apple services future is very bright.

 

[cmaier]

I can't trust anything Apple puts out for news - their bias has been shown by their CEO's virtue signaling while they remain silent on human rights issues in China and censor their apps and services in other countries.

Anyone who uses the term “virtue signaling” really means “i want to judge people based on immutable characteristics or life choices that are none of my business.”

 

[tennisproha]

I can't trust anything Apple puts out for news - their bias has been shown by their CEO's virtue signaling while they remain silent on human rights issues in China and censor their apps and services in other countries.

Apple doesn’t “put [anything] out for news”. They don’t have their own editorial. That’s not how news works. This is just aggregation.

 

[TheIguana]

Why 50% when the standard is 30% on Apple's App Store? What exactly is Apple bringing to the table other than eyeballs? That may be important for smaller print shops, but its unlikely to entice large shops like the NYT, WP or WSJ. Even then, the majority of news people care about is local, so most people will already have good brand identification of their local newspaper/reporting organization.

 

[Jimmdean]

Personally I really like the news app itself. Once you tailor it to get rid of anything remotely political I find it to be a pretty easy way to get your daily news fix.

 

[Deelron]

Just throwing it out there, my Washington Post subscription through Amazon is $3.99 a month, $10-$15 a month sounds reasonable for an aggregate service (if the creators got the lion's share of the revenue).

 

[AngerDanger]

Apple has discussed bundling its news service with iCloud storage tiers and its television service, so an all-in-one package from Apple could be on the horizon.

Maybe they'll be able to reuse the iLife moniker.

 

[nt5672]

Apple doesn’t “put [anything] out for news”. They don’t have their own editorial. That’s not how news works. This is just aggregation.

You mean a curated and thereby politically correct aggregation. Curated by the fact that Apple will not offer the service to certain publications that do not fit Cook's idea of "right for the world", no matter how much fake news they publish.

 

[lunarworks]

Anyone who uses the term “virtue signaling” really means “i want to judge people based on immutable characteristics or life choices that are none of my business.”

Or alternatively, it's used by people who see sincerity as an alien concept. "Why would you support a cause unless your agenda is to gain something from it?"

 

[jarman92]

So, Apple wants to aggregate a bunch of news services which each charge $10 per month. Apple also wants the combined subscription to cost $10 and $5 from it would go to Apple. I think it makes perfect sense. Apple services future is very bright.

Makes sense for Apple, sure. But it makes no sense for publishers. Why should Apple get HALF the revenue when the publishers provide 100% of the content?

Apple is really getting gross with this constant nickel-and-dime approach. They’re supposed to be a step above everyone else but they’re sucking up every cent they can and then sitting on mountains of cash, which they refuse to use for productive things like acquisitions and R&D.

 

[Wags]

Interesting model. Publishers could get revenue that would have never received because individuals might have never signed up. What would they loose from current subscriptions that might change. Could see it getting wild with articles just meant to drive clicks.

 

[Apple_Robert]

Why 50% when the standard is 30% on Apple's App Store? What exactly is Apple bringing to the table other than eyeballs? That may be important for smaller print shops, but its unlikely to entice large shops like the NYT, WP or WSJ. Even then, the majority of news people care about is local, so most people will already have good brand identification of their local newspaper/reporting organization.

Apple is bringing a potentially large user base.

I like that Apple won't allow the services access to user subscription information.

 

[Naraxus]

Apple trying to extort money it doesn’t deserve and is in no way entitled to.

What else is new.....

 

[Mac Fly (film)]

Why 50% when the standard is 30% on Apple's App Store?

Because the story isn’t true.

 

[ksec]

I mean seriously, for only $10 a month split among many publishers, what sort of "quality" do you expect to get?

The way I see it, this will make news content even worst in terms of quality.

 

[centauratlas]

Apple could upend the news market with a simple objective news service. Purchase a paper and have people report news, and news only. Stop with the opinion, guesses and the other BS. Keep the personal opinions out of it.

Nancy Pelosi said: "X, Y, Z"
Donald Trump said: "A,B,C"

with links to the CSPAN transcripts.

MSFT announced $X earnings, stated D,E,F,
APPL announced $Y earnings, stated G,H,I.

Whatever the facts are without the interpretation.

Set the standard for actual news, not opinion.

 

[keysofanxiety]

99% is clickbait

What do you mean? I can give you 10 good reasons why this is untrue.

To find out why, feel free to register to our subscription service. Number 7 will ASTOUND you.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

You mean a curated and thereby politically correct aggregation. Curated by the fact that Apple will not offer the service to certain publications that do not fit Cook's idea of "right for the world", no matter how much fake news they publish.

We, the consumer, curate it. I curate what publications I want to read from News all the time.