Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple in Negotiations With Content Providers for Internet-Based Subscription Television Service

An attempt to bypass the cable companies, yet the cable companies own the broadband lines. Interesting battle ahead among multiple parties.

Too bad there is not also an Apple Fiber to help Google make the cable companies irrelevant.
 
alent1234 said:
some people are dumb and will a la carte themselves to high prices
Click to expand...

Not all of us want 50-100 channels. Some of us have better things to do than wade through that much crap. Personally I need 3-4 channels to fill all my television viewing needs.
 
Wow, how has Apple kept this a secret so long? This is the first time I have heard of this. They must be tripling, nay, QUADRUPLING down on secrecy! :rolleyes:
 
Apple being a stand alone provider via internet would not be possible due to the broadband data caps that are spreading across the usa.
 
mozumder said:
ESPN charges cable companies $15-$20/month just for them.

If you want A-la-carte, it's going to cost at least that much.

It really is going to be that expensive.
Click to expand...
Still cheaper than what I'm paying Dish Network. I can get an antenna for the local channels and I already have Amazon Prime. Add ESPN and I'd be set. All for roughly $40-$50 cheaper than what I'm paying now.
 
tipp said:
Nice insult when you clearly don't understand people's motivation here. Cable cutters (I am one) don't mind paying, they just don't want to pay upwards of $80-$100 per month for a ton of channels they have no interest in watching. HBO + ESPN + Comedy Central + 5 other random channels are not worth that much. There's also the issue of not wanting to support oligopolies made up of dinosaur companies who have no clue how or desire to innovate, and actually oppose it until they are forced to act (DVRs). The cable companies have effectively halted the process of innovation in the television industry. It's well past time for a serious disruption.
Click to expand...

You know whenever someone pops up and is unhappy about being ripped off, someone else also pops up calls him a socialist, free-loader, and denigrates to some kind of criminal who doesn't deserve anything. :rolleyes:
the issue is not just with the channels, but why do subscribers have to watch the same exact commercials as everyone else, what are they paying them 3 digit numbers for then?
 
I really don't care what convoluted, bureaucratic process companies use to sell me TV. Just let me choose and pay for only the channels I want.
 
Google are already pushing internet + TV with google fiber, it's not available to many of us right now but they are workin on it.

https://fiber.google.com/about/

The option for free internet is pretty sweet
 
tipp said:
Nice insult when you clearly don't understand people's motivation here. Cable cutters (I am one) don't mind paying, they just don't want to pay upwards of $80-$100 per month for a ton of channels they have no interest in watching. HBO + ESPN + Comedy Central + 5 other random channels are not worth that much. There's also the issue of not wanting to support oligopolies made up of dinosaur companies who have no clue how or desire to innovate, and actually oppose it until they are forced to act (DVRs). The cable companies have effectively halted the process of innovation in the television industry. It's well past time for a serious disruption.
Click to expand...

Exactly. For example Discovery used to be my favorite channel without a doubt (years ago). Now - I never watch it because the content has been dumbed down to it being just another "reality" channel. We have almost 200 channels (DirecTV) and we watch maybe 6 to 8 channels on a regular basis.

The problem with a la carte will be the individual channels will be priced too high for their value. It's lose-lose for the consumer who wants quality programming.
 
jfrancis04 said:
That's literally the one thing holding me back from cutting out my satellite completely. Freakin' ESPN.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised at the number of similar comments here; I had previously assumed that most would-be cord cutters were frustrated at the expense of subsidizing the high-cost channels like ESPN and were at least looking for an a la carte plan that would get them the few other lower-cost channels that they really want for some savings per month.

If even the high-cost and premium-channel viewers are clamoring for a la carte, then the TV viewing market is apparently much more segmented than I thought.
 
Why would I switch from amazon prime? I get free shipping on deodorant and get to watch movies and TV...
 
jfrancis04 said:
Yes! I really hope this happens soon. That's literally the one thing holding me back from cutting out my satellite completely. Freakin' ESPN.
Click to expand...

For you sports fanatics ESPN is probably the biggest reason why one's monthly cable bill is so high. ESPN commands a high price and for those of us who don't watch that station, well, we end up pay for it.
 
Another thing: at what point do the broadcast networks become all sports and news? What's the purpose of using scarce spectrum to broadcast some idiotic comedy that can easily be delivered via broadband?
 
Sunday Ticket would be amazing. That's the only thing keeping me from getting rid of the digital package I have and just going with the most basic tv package.
 
apple always busy improving their apple TV, it's a good thing, but i hope that these improvements will not cause the apple TV's price to rise.
 
Cable companies wouldnt be so bad if they had to compete against each other.Like in NYC one borough only has cablevision the other Time Warner why cant every cable company be in the same area make them compete against each other.That'll bring prices down for sure
 
alent1234 said:
some people are dumb and will a la carte themselves to high prices
Click to expand...

It's not just about trying to cut costs (although that's a large part). I want more options in how I get my content. I don't want to be forced to pay the cable/satellite gods in order to get things like new HBO shows and whatnot.

Even if I take into the cost of netflix and hulu, and the higher internet cost of me not being able to bundle with TV, I'm still saving about $50 / month by not subscribing to cable tv. That gives me plenty of room to pay for some other things while still saving a decent amount of money per month.

However, let's say I wasn't saving any more by paying for more a la carte options. Given the choice of paying comcast for tons of channels I'll never watch and paying the exact same price for exactly what I will watch, and whenever I want to, I'll gladly choose the latter.
 
Give me Food Network, Disney Channel and the History Channel for a reasonable price each and I would gladly sign up. If the price is right, I might also go for Animal Planet and HGTV as well. But I don't care about HBO, showtime, Cinemax, etc.

I buy the movies that I want to watch and then I can watch them when I want, not when they want to show them and their original content is garbage.

I couldn't care less about sports, so no need to have ESPN, etc.

The channels that I listed that I would want should probably be offered for about $3/month a piece, but if you want to bundle say 5 channels, then offer the bundle for $10/month or something like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back