Apple Expected to Launch Subscription News Service Within Next Year Following Texture Acquisition

[69650]

On the other hand they typically make about 30% margin on these services after paying licensing, since they're basically the "retailers" selling someone else's content.

If they sell me a $2000 MBP at a 50% margin, they make $1000 profit from me. If they sell me 3 services at $10/month each, they make $9/month from me and I have to remain subscribed for 1000/9 / 12 = 9.25 years before Apple makes the same profit. And that ignores that with the MBP sale they get the entire $1000 up front and over 9 years I'm going to buy more than one MBP. I currently still have a 2009 and 2012 Mac Mini. Based on my purchase history of minis. Apple has lost 2 mini sales to me so far by not updating the product. Even if I go all in on their services, they will never make as much from me in services as they have lost in hardware.

Apple is much better off focusing on making a decent MBP rather than dividing all their efforts on services that don't make them a whole lot of money compared to hardware.

Same logic works for the iPhones Apple is letting stagnate while Google/Samsung lap them. There is very little difference between an iPhone 8 and iPhone 6s. Camera improvements and a faster CPU only go so far at improving the user experience. They're blowing potential upgrade customers, and they're not going to make it up on magazine subscriptions.

These things are not mutually exclusive. Apple can make a decent MBP and launch subscription services at the same time.
[doublepost=1524015703][/doublepost]

No way will Apple’s original video content be separate from Apple Music. Especially now with Spotify and Hulu joining forces. My guess is Apple will offer an Apple Music + Video subscription for $15/mo.

That would make it too expensive for many users compared to the other music streaming services. I think they will be separate services to compete with Spotify and Netflix.

 

[Rogifan]

That would make it too expensive for many users compared to the other music streaming services. I think they will be separate services to compete with Spotify and Netflix.

They could still offer a music only service. I just don’t see them launching all these separate services. People won’t want to pay for a subscription for Apple Music and another for Apple TV and another for Apple News and another for iCloud storage etc. Apple needs to wrap all that up into one service, one monthly fee.

 

[PeLaNo]

Please. Expand. News. To. Other. Countries.

Seriously, didn't News.app launch with iOS 9? They're able to push so quickly with some things (hardware, carriers, Music) to hundreds of countries but News seems stuck in just a few locales. Heck, even Pay is available in more places.

I believe they’ve launched  music with 100+ country at the same time,isn’t it ?

 

[Tech198]

This could be good, but a service is not a service if everything isn't on it.
It's a start (like everything else is i suppose.)

 

[69650]

They could still offer a music only service. I just don’t see them launching all these separate services. People won’t want to pay for a subscription for Apple Music and another for Apple TV and another for Apple News and another for iCloud storage etc. Apple needs to wrap all that up into one service, one monthly fee.

I don’t think they will do that because the headline price for a multi-service subscription would have to be quite high which would probably put a lot of people off. I don’t see any evidence that people will not buy multiple subscriptions from Apple. Look how many people seperately subscribe to Spotify, Netflix and Amazon Prime. By seperating out the subscription services they can keep them priced below the magic $10/month. If you bundle them together they would have to charge at least $30/month to make it profitable.

 

[Rogifan]

I don’t think they will do that because the headline price for a multi-service subscription would have to be quite high which would probably put a lot of people off. I don’t see any evidence that people will not buy multiple subscriptions from Apple. Look how many people seperately subscribe to Spotify, Netflix and Amazon Prime. By seperating out the subscription services they can keep them priced below the magic $10/month. If you bundle them together they would have to charge at least $30/month to make it profitable.

I’m not saying only a bundle (though I’m still skeptical their original tv programming will be on its own at least initially) but maybe a deal for those who don’t want to manage all these separate subscriptions from one company. Call it the Apple Buncle or something. The more you bundle the better the deal. They should do the same thing with hardware. Expand the iPhone upgrade program to other Apple products. I’d pay $100 - $150 a month for an iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch with the ability to upgrade every two years.

 

[jlc1978]

What do ads add to your life? x_X

A well crafted ad can be enjoyable to view. Some are funny, some are thought provoking, others visibly appealing.

I point you to Seagrams mixes with everything, except driving; Absolute's "Absolute" series, or even Apple's Here's to the Crazy Ones.

Sure, a lot are crap, but then ninety percent of everything is crap; even caviar.
[doublepost=1524056568][/doublepost]

Apple should not be the thought police. Let any publication that wants to join participate, and let the customer decide what they want to consume. The only "policing" that need take place is the rejection of publications that incite/promote the killing of people or the commission of crimes.

I disagree. Apple is a private company and has no obligation to allow anyone access to it's platforms; any more than Breitbart or Mother Jones has to offer opposing viewpoints on their platforms.

Ultimately, what they chose to offer reflects their world view; it is up to consumers to decide if they will support that by buying the product.

 

[DevNull0]

These things are not mutually exclusive. Apple can make a decent MBP and launch subscription services at the same time.

You would think so, I agree. Apple is focusing on these subscription services we're talking about here, but Apple doesn't seem to be able to keep their macs up to date. It's been 4 years since they released a mini which was a step down from the mini they released 6 years ago. 5 years since they released a mac pro which was a step down from the mac pro from 10 years year. MBA hasn't been updated in 3 years. MB 2 years. Even the MBP is coming up on a year old when new Intel chips came out 6 months ago.

Besides, if I don't have a mac to use their subscriptions on because I'd rather buy a 2018 NUC over a 2014 mac mini a higher price, I won't using any of their subscriptions either.

 

[Tech198]

I don’t think they will do that because the headline price for a multi-service subscription would have to be quite high which would probably put a lot of people off. I don’t see any evidence that people will not buy multiple subscriptions from Apple. Look how many people seperately subscribe to Spotify, Netflix and Amazon Prime. By separating out the subscription services they can keep them priced below the magic $10/month. If you bundle them together they would have to charge at least $30/month to make it profitable.

What about an all-in-one package... with the user just ticking off what services they want? (apple music, iCloud, News subscription etc.) and price will be adjusted automatically per account based on what they need ?

Wouldn't this be much better than separate individual services ? This way the user only have to buy one package, but price is dynamic based on what "individual services" selected..

eg: one bundle = Apple music, News iCloud drive = User disables iCloud Drive and News, so user only pays for music... vs three separate services each at their own price points.

Overall, a much easier to manage experience.

 

[Solomani]

Perhaps it's just me, and perhaps I'm out of touch, and perhaps I'm totally wrong.
but does this not have "Fail" written all over it ?

Why? Care to explain yourself?

What Apple is attempting to do is really only something a little more than a "curated news service". Which is not a new idea, and not necessarilly a bad idea. It's not like they are going to become an independent newspaper like the Washington Post.

They will still outsource original news and content from places like Reuters, TIME, AP, etc.

The only real issue here is…. how profitable will they be with this venture, and did they pay too much for Texture? And none of us (including you) will really know the answer to that for at least a couple more years.

 

[idrewuk]

I love Apple News. I've found myself using it daily, great interface and unearths way more content than I'd find on my own.

 

[truthertech]

Perhaps it's just me, and perhaps I'm out of touch, and perhaps I'm totally wrong.
but does this not have "Fail" written all over it ?

No offense, but you are a little out of touch. Texture is already a success and proven model of people willing to pay for an all in one place for high quality magazines with digital enhancements. Apple News is a great success with probably well over a hundred million monthly active users now. Apple has been hitting it out of the ball park with services and this is a smart move. You're also missing the fact that Apple is building an array of media--Apple Music, Books, Podcasts, Magazines/News, and Video that they will likely be able to offer with an attractive bundle package.

 

[AppleScruff1]

They could still offer a music only service. I just don’t see them launching all these separate services. People won’t want to pay for a subscription for Apple Music and another for Apple TV and another for Apple News and another for iCloud storage etc. Apple needs to wrap all that up into one service, one monthly fee.

The true Apple fans would.

 

[truthertech]

What about an all-in-one package... with the user just ticking off what services they want? (apple music, iCloud, News subscription etc.) and price will be adjusted automatically per account based on what they need ?

Wouldn't this be much better than separate individual services ? This way the user only have to buy one package, but price is dynamic based on what "individual services" selected..

eg: one bundle = Apple music, News iCloud drive = User disables iCloud Drive and News, so user only pays for music... vs three separate services each at their own price points.

Overall, a much easier to manage experience.

You're over complicating this. That's not the way Apple works. Apple keeps things simple and will likely offer individual services because that's all some people want, and indeed some may work on other platforms, e.g., Apple Music, but not others, and then a bundle price.

 

[ipedro]

I'm totally with you, and have thought for years there should be a newspaper equivalent to 'Spotify', 'Pandora', Apple Music, etc. I currently pay subscriptions to a couple big-name newspapers, but none are actually LOCAL for me (I live in the sticks), and I really just want to read national / international articles, and ideally the same topic from a couple different points of view to try and break up the 'echo chamber'. It ends up being *just* more than what is usually allowed per month by typical 'paywall' limits (10 articles per month?), but is hardly enough to justify a full subscription to multiple papers - particularly when a significant portion of each is dedicated to 'local' news, happenings, entertainment, 'society' etc that has zero relevance to me, as I'm not local. I'd be perfectly willing to pay $10-$20/mo to have access to 50 top papers, and know that a fraction of that payment went to each paper / journalist whose articles I read, just as now I can listen to my choice of top musicians and have a part of my music subscription go to support the artists I listen to, without having to sign up for a separate subscription to each music label.

Can't say I'd be as interested in subscription access to magazines.

That's the beauty of this model. You may be interested in newspapers and others may be interested in niche magazines. What you read contributes financially to the ones you read. You don't have to consciously choose subscriptions. Just read.

 

[Abazigal]

I don't know. The unlimited access subscription model might be enticing, but to be honest, this feels a bit too late. I mean I don't even remember the last time I read a magazine. For news, we are already enjoying them piece-meal thanks to the internet. Plus nowadays, many magazines have editorial as good as some random blogger on the internet, ie. crap. Just look at tech magazines. I get more updated and useful content from youtubers like mkbhd than magazines.

There are few genres that still fit the magazine style like fashion, but then again those genres tend to be served better through the physical magazines, not digital.

I think that’s precisely the whole point. With the internet, the concept of a magazine no longer makes sense. These days, we use search to locate articles we want to read and ignore those they we don’t. No point paying full price for a magazine where I may only be interested in a fraction of the content they offer.

With a Netflix style offering, it’s easier for me to hop from one magazine to another and cherry pick only the articles I want to read. There is less of a barrier to trying new content and this is better than giving certain publishers the berth altogether.

 

[MillieWales]

If it works like they describe here, then probably, yes. I’m an avid reader and love Apples News app. But given most magazine subscriptions only cost $10 to $15 a year, I would have to regularly subscribe, or want to subscribe, to more than 12 magazines a year to get value from this plan. Right now my wife and I subscribe to four magazines (Nat Geo, Smithsonian, Discover, and Wired) and that is probably way more than most people and we barely have time to keep up with those.

They do of course vary massively in price, monthly magazines I've not found many of the big sellers for much under $20 a month, they are even more expensive here in the UK, and the weekly magazines start at $100 and go up to $200. For me it works out that I'd have to have 4-5 digital subscriptions to cover the cost of a service like this. I subscribe to Readly, loads of the big UK magazines but I can also access all of the US magazines and those from dozens of other countries. I read maybe 8-10 different magazines a month, I don't sit and read them all page by page, I skim through to the best articles and read things of interest, but I couldn't afford to do that without the app. My daughter reads horse magazines, comics and a WWE Kids magazine. My son reads gaming magazines - 4 I believe. My wife reads loads, again she skims, but she reads gardening, home and cooking / food magazines. My dad reads technology magazines and news. we all share the same account with Readly. Not bad for £10 a month I think.