Unfortunately, Apple has little control of when studios decide to release movies to rental. Studios need to support their brick-&-morter theaters first.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Continues to Dominate U.S. Online Video Purchase and Rental Markets
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Unfortunately, Apple has little control of when studios decide to release movies to rental. Studios need to support their brick-&-morter theaters first.
Great example of consumer inertia. Apple's high rate is due to the fact it's built into iOS, much like Internet Explorer in Windows. Neither the quality of downloads, price, or rental terms is superior to other services, but it is the easiest to use for iOS users.
is this slide suppose to make me ignore NETFLIX surging business ?
who "buys" digital content anyway??
stream or gtfo
You mean like the movie I bought last night? Or the one last week? Or the TV show I bought a season pass to? Or was it those three I bought in December. Or "The Hobbit."
Yeah, plenty of people buy the stuff. Netflix is great, but let me know when "The Hobbit" or "Silver Linings Playbook" hit it in a year.
Sure but the whole point of taking the family to the movies is to get them OUT of the house. Also why spend $10 a head to watch a movie on a small screen? The most popular home TV is 60" but even a 100" screen is small in comparison to a movie theatre. You lose a lot. I have a Sony 1080p projector w/ 100" Stewart screen so I talk from experience.
Its the concessions
This is a pretty sweet idea. But like you said, theaters would fear the bootlegger having a movie party. More importantly they would raise holy hell if they miss out on concessions. The theaters make the vast majority of their money (profit) on overpriced concessions.
This is a pretty sweet idea. But like you said, theaters would fear the bootlegger having a movie party. More importantly they would raise holy hell if they miss out on concessions. The theaters make the vast majority of their money (profit) on overpriced concessions.
The movie theater companies will fight this to the death. I'm willing to bet companies like AMC would boycott showing a movie that was distributed like this by a major studio. AMC knows that's where its profit comes from, and the movie studios know their big bucks come from millions watching something at the giant theater chains.
I totally agree with you that it's a great idea. Charge me $50 or something, maybe even $65 and throw in the HD download when it becomes available in a few months. I barely go watch stuff in theaters because it's either too expensive for what you get or is crappy quality. Seeing a blown-up image that's fuzzy isn't exactly worth $15. I thought "The Hobbit" in 3-D with the 48fps was pretty neat. But that's the exception right now.
These theaters need to work on video resolution. From 10 feet, you really can't get better than 1080p TVs. Figure out how to replicate that picture quality -- they've figured sound out -- and then we'll talk again.
This matches my experience. I buy from Apple. I expect Netflix, Amazon and other services to basically give me product for free or for very cheap monthly services. These services have trained me to think this way. While Apple has trained me to expect to pay but to get an easy and convenient service. Apple can raise its prices because I can decide right at the point when I want to watch something if the price is worth it. But if NetFlix ever raises its prices I'm cancelling it. Too many weeks go by when I don't use it and too frustrating to never really know what will be available on it.
Netflix is losing money on streaming outside the US. They have been borrowing heavily to keep the business going until the number of subscriptions outside the US has gone up enough to start making a profit.
THIS is the most important part of the study: Apple is missing out on streaming video and music. The market is shifting again and while Apple was at the forefront of the digital media revolution, it's behind in the next phase: streaming. I love Apple, but they need to catch up.
Last edited:
Its interesting to see What different people like. I would much rather prefer my home tv (a 50" sony) than on a movie screen. I think the movie theater quality isn't as good as my tv (even if the specs say it is). However I do feel as though I loose out on sound quality at home since I don't have a surround sounds system.
But to each their own.
Of all the ways companies limit what I can do with the video I purchase/rent, I like Apples way the best.
Apple has tried this in the past (since 2010) with smaller films, with only moderate success. They still do it for smaller films.
Check it out here: iTunes Offers Movie Rental Before Theatrical Release
Last edited:
Netflix should be king
I rarely watch movies, and never TV from Apple. Not worth the price. Netflix, for $8/month, is good enough.
I don't care if I don't see a movie until 2 years after release. Almost never hit the movie theaters either. If I want to spend big bucks, I'll either save up to buy tax exempt municipal bonds for retirement, or a $5 cup of coffee, or upgrade my iPad, MBP, or iPhone, or take a vacation somewhere and see the world from other than the comforts of a couch.
Being entertained is not worth premium prices.
I rarely watch movies, and never TV from Apple. Not worth the price. Netflix, for $8/month, is good enough.
I don't care if I don't see a movie until 2 years after release. Almost never hit the movie theaters either. If I want to spend big bucks, I'll either save up to buy tax exempt municipal bonds for retirement, or a $5 cup of coffee, or upgrade my iPad, MBP, or iPhone, or take a vacation somewhere and see the world from other than the comforts of a couch.
Being entertained is not worth premium prices.
So maybe it's time for NPD to do another study.
Or have they already done the Netflix + on-demand + Apple + others study?
There is a service that is suppose to launch that will feature first run movies that you can access at home while the movie is still in the theater.
I forget the name of it, but it's initial price is insanely high. It would be nice if the studios adopted this for the everyman and a decent price point- I bet box office numbers would soar.
Certainly, but for the vast majority of people the whole movie experience is going to the theater; especially for families with kids, and of course all but the most introverted kids love going out. Also some movies are just made for the big screen, regardless of quality. Imagine if the original Star Wars was straight to streaming. I doubt it would have had the same landmark impact on a 50in screen.
Apple dominates the sell-through market because there isn't really much competition. Everyone else seems to be going down the subscription/streaming route. I'm always surprised that nobody else has built an iTunes type buy to own "all in one store" format.
for me and millions of others, the compelling reason is that iTunes is "built-in" to my iPhone, iPad, Mac, and Apple TV so it's easy and convenient.
if as you say content is king, that doesn't exactly explain the success of Netfilx, as most people I know say that their selection stinks, and I don't think one or two "exclusive" TV shows is going to make or break their subscriber numbers. the iTunes Store has most everything Netfilx has plus a lot more, they even sometimes offer rentals of movies currently playing in theaters! so, content-wise, I think they're just fine.
If apple could pull a Netflix or buy them so they can stream then I might go to iTunes for all my needs but right now my roku gives me all my options with Hulu and Netflix. Anything I want not on those services I can find on the net and stream it to my roku via plex channel. Roku is probably not as nice as a Apple TV unit but it does give more options and that is what a consumer wants in this market more options.