Apple Enlists Networks to Negotiate With Local Affiliates in Streaming TV Talks

[hick9]

I want one device to rule them all as well. I think you missed my point .. I never said they should not add NEW tech to products. That's ridiculous. Everything you mentioned is new cutting edge technology. I could be wrong, but I am sure Apple sees adding a TV tuner to AppleTV like adding a CD ROM to a new Mac. They see it as old tech.

As for changes in engineering and OS/Interface updates .. I made that statement based on the assumption the product is finished and has been for some time.

I think Apple has a bigger vision for this streaming package and the AppleTV is only part of it. I think they are focused on an app that can stream the service on the entire Apple platform... iPhone, iPad, iTouch.

 

[hick9]

I mean... why not? TiVo exists still. Rumors previously were a device that would be a cable box for Time Warner... a device that's provider-agnostic and stand alone would be a pretty big deal. And the form wouldn't have to change much... the DirecTV Genie main boxes are rather small, have 5 tuners and a large hard drive. And the slave boxes to the main are only as wide and tall as the ports on the back still.

I get what your saying.. And I don't necessarily disagree. I just think Apple has a different/bigger vision for this streaming package and the AppleTV is only part of it. I think they are focused more on an app that can stream the service on the entire Apple platform... iPhone, iPad, iTouch. A new remote will be a greatly welcomed addition.

 

[hick9]

Man this was a long post.

I know. I think HobeSoundDarryl is a good guy.. I keep telling him not to drink so much coffee.

 

[SeaFox]

How could I know that you have worked within the industry? However, as such, you should well know what many here seem to miss: that commercials running on upwards of hundreds of channels "I" never watch help pay for it all, including the stuff "I" do watch.

The channels aren't all necessarily sharing revenue with each other. Just the other channels within their core group. Yes, there are local ads inserted too that you provider gets revenue from.

Your comment reads like you lack an understanding of your industry... as if cutting a typical cableTV bundle of channels from 200 to an al-a-carte 20 should perhaps result in a cut of the cable bill by up to about 90% too.

No I don't. I think it's quite hilarious when folks try to do a straight divide and multiply to "estimate" how much a la carte cable would cost.

But if you know your industry, you should recognize that any embracing of some hypothetical al-a-carte model would revolve around all players making MORE money, not less... so I would expect price modeling something like this:

• 200 channels for about $75/month
• 20 al-a-carte channels for about $100/month (but probably more than that).

No, I think your pricing model is too extreme. You're ignoring the point that people are dropping the (current) service because of the high prices. I can see the 20 channels a la carte being $60/mo, though. It's cheaper than the full package, but at the same time people will see the difference in the number of channels and it will keep a lot of people on the old system. But estimating this is hard anyway since, as we've been talking about, the channels all have different values. The price could vary widely based on what people choose.
But that brings me back to my original post. If I'm not going to get "true a la carte" (pick channels one at a time) then I sure as hell don't want one of the most expensive channels in basic cable included in the base package if I'm not interested in it. That would just be transplanting the problems with the current system into streaming services.

 

[benji888]

Wow I want the drugs you guys are smoking because that must be some high-quality stuff.

...

2) Commercials are the main form of revenue for networks and shows now that cable exploded in it's expansion. The price you pay for your cable package subsidizes the niche channels a few would pay for, but not many.

BUT, when you get cable, you get a DV-R, whereby you can record shows and fast forward through commercials, or, in some cases, I think you can record and actually skip commercials. This is not possible online at all, online you are forced to watch commercials, this MUST change!

 

[benji888]

Apple already offers TV content without commercials.

Nope, only those that already do not have commercials...Netflix, HBO & Showtime, which you pay extra for. All the other channels in Apple TV include commercials in their content, even YouTube.

The providers Apple is in talks with have commercials with their content wherever it is available online, whether that is Hulu + or however you can watch it, and you cannot skip or fast forward past the commercials like you can with cable & DV-R.

It kills me that people don't notice how they somehow slipped in commercials over the years. Yes that was the premise of cable. You pay for programming without commercials. Originally it was only the over the air content that had commercials. I have no idea how they got away with adding in advertisements. It's why I don't have cable. I'm not getting what I pay for.

Someone who knows where I am coming from

Please, everyone, again, let's give Apple feedback, tell them, for all paid channels/packages we want no commercials or ability to skip them! http://www.apple.com/feedback/appletv.html

 

[2010mini]

Nope, only those that already do not have commercials...Netflix, HBO & Showtime, which you pay extra for. All the other channels in Apple TV include commercials in their content, even YouTube....

what are you talking about? I regularly buy or redeem TV shows that have no commercials. When the same show airs, it has commercials

that is what i meant by " Apple already offers content without commercials"

All the other channels are not offered by Apple. They are offered by their respective network/Studio

 

[benji888]

what are you talking about? I regularly buy or redeem TV shows that have no commercials. When the same show airs, it has commercials

that is what i meant by " Apple already offers content without commercials"

All the other channels are not offered by Apple. They are offered by their respective network/Studio

I'm sure this is true if you were to buy an episode on Amazon or anyplace else for that matter, but, most of us cannot afford to pay per episode, it adds up fast.

I was referring to Apple TV channels (your last sentence), and, channel packages for $ that Apple is working on. Free ABC channel on apple tv, watch limited episodes, but, forced to watch/wait for commercials. If I pay for channel packages, I am not going to be forced into watching/waiting for commercials! ...While you pay for Hulu +, you still get commercials. You pay for Netflix, no commercials. Yet, on cable, at least you can record shows or pause and skip/FF commercials. This is what I am talking about.

 

[Hookemfins]

Thanks for your detailed response. I admit I know basically nothing about the TV business.

That said, lets keep AMC as the example here. if AMC gets 10 million viewers a month, thats 29,900,000 dollars a month not counting ad revenue.
Do they even make that now from their TV channel? as far as the other channels that are bundled with it not making money shouldn't be AMCs problem.

Honestly, at $2.99 a month I think AMC can easily get 20-30 million monthly subscribers. we are talking 100 million a month, billion+ a year not counting ad revenue.

AMC's stand alone service is rumored to get priced at $5.99/month. If you get AMC as part of a TV provider you are technically only paying .25+/-.
AMC, or any channel, gets their money on a per subscriber agreement with each TV provider. Any channel that ultimately offers stand alone will command more money than from a TV provider. AMC as any other channel get most of their revenue from ads. AMC runs a tremendous amount of commercials.

I think your 20-30 million is quite a bit too many for stand alone, especially if you can't FF through commercials.
I am not sure how accurate this estimate is. It I'd say that AMC gets roughly $13 million from provides.