Apple in Talks to Bring Ads to Apple TV+

[npmacuser5]

My skill with the mute button are highly find tuned today.

 

[sleven]

I don’t pay for ads.

Soon, we all will.

 

[brofkand]

Very little on AppleTV+ appeals to me to begin with, let alone to sit through ads? Get bent.

 

[rman0726]

What’s new? This has been around for decades. Before streaming it was just called cable.

1. There’s no free lunch. Whoever is making the content you see has to be compensated somehow. I think we all believe this is fair.
2. Whoever owns the channel (Apple, Netflix, Fox etc) is expected to deliver higher profit to shareholders every year. That will eventually lead to either higher prices, more ads or less/cheaper content for the same price. Or they will take some of the compensation in (1).

So (2) will push price/value up until more people resort to piracy leaving even less for those making the content.

Edit: what’s ironic is that the people in (2) can claim that not paying for the content is piracy and is hurting people in (1), but them self taking money from (1) is perfectly fine 🤷‍♂️

The internet in 2023: Actors and writers need to be paid what they are worth!!!

The internet in 2024: wtf why are all the studios raising their prices?!

 

[turbineseaplane]

The internet in 2023: Actors and writers need to be paid what they are worth!!!

The internet in 2024: wtf why are all the studios raising their prices?!

You've made the mistake of assuming "price increase" = "actors and writers get paid more"

 

[ninecows]

Same -- I'll do basically anything else with my time on Earth

Not paying to watch ads?

On this Earth you have to pay NOT to see ads. Like it or not.

Personally I don’t like those terms, but I don’t set the rules 🤷‍♂️

I wish people would ignore ads more. Just don’t click them. Don’t react to them. If a product has a good ratio between value and price it doesn’t need ads. It’s when that ratio goes down that ads are needed. At the end of the day you’re actually paying for any ad that makes you buy the product.

 

[rman0726]

You've made the mistake of assuming "price increase" = "actors and writers get paid more"

They are being paid more as part of the union contracts they signed last year. Now the studios are coming to recoup their increased expenses.

 

[orbital~debris]

I can't link, but you can find the sources easily:

"This data measured 215 billion global visits to piracy websites in 2022, an 18% year-over-year increase compared with 2021. The U.S. unsurprisingly had the largest share of film and TV demand (i.e., illicit streams, downloads and the like) of any country, with more than 13.5 billion visits to piracy sites."

"Illegal downloading of copyrighted materials takes up 24% of the global bandwidth."

I wouldn't call having to search 10+ services for the content you want ease of access while you can source your torrents from a single site. With software like plex, configured easily even to run on NAS, it's less hassle than using multiple different platforms. Video streaming is a horrible sh*tshow compared to music streaming. I've stopped downloading music 10+ years ago and never looked back, because using Spotify or Apple Music is indeed more simple and convenient than managing it on your own.

Furthermore that's not the only way to pirate, there is a plethora of illegal streaming sites.

Nice to see some data – looks like the source is Variety.

Variety also have this in another article (https://variety.com/2023/biz/entert...-tv-movies-or-live-sports-in-2022-1235525708/ - emphasis added), which gives a bit of relative perspective to the piracy visit & bandwidth numbers:

"Approximately 23 million U.S. adults (11%) pirated content in the last year, according to an exclusive survey fielded last month for VIP+ by YouGov."

And:

"Whilst the vast majority of Americans are law-abiding when it comes to content consumption, a sizable proportion confess to dabbling with illegal downloads or streams for TV shows, movies or live sports."

I see your point about having to search multiple services being detrimental to ease of use. Apple's solution with the way their TV app works to minimise this (Netflix being the notable holdout having a negative impact here on completeness). But with ease of use I was really referring to 'non-tech' people who have already found the transition from 'regular', point remote & click TV to streaming TV challenging. Picture them getting the entire process (which itself is ever-evolving) working so they can relax and watch a show they're interested in with minimal hassle…

 

[!!!]

Apple will become the same ad-infested ecosystem as everyone else. They want that juicy ad revenue. Apple TV+ is already annoying with just their in-house ads. If you want to watch an episode of a series, you have to endure ads for other series, maybe ads for a podcast (like For All Mankind), the preview, and the intro before you can watch.

My favorite parts of ATV+ was how every show needed to have a minute long intro sequence, and the fact that recaps and intros couldn't be skipped automatically. Also the fact that I couldn't disable auto-play of the next episode.

 

[JKBRV]

Apple is working on the introduction of advertisements on Apple TV+ in the United Kingdom, according to The Telegraph.

Apple has apparently been in discussions with the UK's Broadcaster's Audience Research Board (BARB) to explore the necessary data collection techniques for monitoring advertising results. Currently, BARB provides viewing statistics for major UK networks including the BBC, ITV, Channel 4, and Sky, as well as Apple TV+ programming. These new discussions suggest that Apple is preparing to implement an ad-supported tier on its streaming service, similar to moves made by competitors such as Netflix, Disney+, and Amazon Prime Video.

While BARB already monitors viewing time for Apple TV+ content, additional techniques are required to track advertising metrics accurately. This data is vital for advertisers to assess the reach and impact of their campaigns on the platform. In addition to the UK, Apple has also reportedly held similar discussions with ratings organizations in the United States.

Apple has already included limited advertising in its live sports events, such as last year's Major League Soccer coverage, where ads were incorporated even for Season Pass holders. It is also notable that in March Apple hired Joseph Cady, a former advertising executive from NBCUniversal, to bolster its video advertising team.

Competitors like Netflix and Disney+ have successfully launched lower-cost, ad-supported tiers, which have helped them attract additional subscribers and increase revenue. For instance, Netflix recently reported record revenues, partly due to a 34% increase in subscribers to its ad-supported tier. The push towards an ad-supported tier comes at a time when Apple is reportedly reducing its spending on Apple TV+ content after investing over $20 billion in original programming.

Article Link: Apple in Talks to Bring Ads to Apple TV+

The moment this happens in the USA is the moment I cancel my subscription.

 

[mazz0]

I'm sure there's a better word we can come up with for this.

"Capitalism".

 

[Biro]

How is it worsening their service? Ad-free isn't going away. They are adding an option, not taking away an option.

Honestly, I don’t mean to flame you but you sound just like the people who were in denial when Netflix started the same thing.

 

[cjboffoli97]

My Apple TV+ subscription is already borderline not worth it for me. Having to endure ads will probably compel me to cancel.

 

[Johnnyboy55]

I know it'll probably not happen, but I'd love for Apple to split the tv into two distinct lines, and have a more sleek premium model finished in Space Black aluminium, with a weighted braided cable. Then make the current/standard model considerable less expensive to broaden the customer base.

The SE and Pro Max?😉

 

[platinumaqua]

I thought my interest in the service couldn't be lower and then this comes up

Also: give me back the original Videos app (which already shows up instead of ATV app in regions not supporting Apple TV) instead of the ad infested Apple TV app.

 

[aaronhead14]

Oh heck no!

 

[orbital~debris]

*If* I’ve understood things correctly then part of the reason the likes of ITV have seen revenues fall is because companies are holding back on TV advertising right now because of costs?

I would think an Apple TV+ audience, a subset of whom being Apple hardware product owners, is a very attractive prospect to advertisers as historically they've been bigger spenders/keen to buy premium products & services.

So those same companies might open their wallet to advertise on an Apple entertainment platform.

 

[jimimac71]

Advertising is what keeps TV, radio, magazines and newspapers alive.
(MacRumors is not the only website to offer ad free for an extra cost.)
I only have cable TV. I pay extra for a package (tier) that includes Turner Classic Movies. Like Apple TV+, TCM promotes itself between movies, but is otherwise ad free, since Ted Turner created it 30 years ago.
My point, advertising works. If it ain't broke .....
It's my feeling ATV (the box) and ATV+ are Apple Toys.
Bring back the iPod Touch.

 

[Pezimak]

They can reduce the price of their tier then, they certainly better not rise it!

 

[ninecows]

They are being paid more as part of the union contracts they signed last year. Now the studios are coming to recoup their increased expenses.

Yeah… because God Adam Smith forbid that the studios should just settle for less.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Advertising is what keeps TV, radio, magazines and newspapers alive.

It's not really doing a very good job of that in the case of magazines and newspapers

Advertising as a primary means of funding needs to die in a fire

 

[orbital~debris]

There I was in an Apple Store yesterday looking at an Apple TV device. I didn't buy it. I think I might have escaped here.
Sorry Tim Apple, you just lost a sale. I'll skip Apple Content. I have enough free-to-air channels on FreeSat that I can record and skip the ads when playing it back.
Backwards step.

I'd argue it's not about having quantity. It's about having quality – which, in my opinion, is what tv+ brings (with regards to scripts, production, actors, sets/locations, visual effects, music/soundtrack, streaming picture & audio quality and overall entertainment value).

I've watched a large proportion of what Apple offer, and to a great extent it's excellent quality for all of those factors.

And none of that touches on the user-experience of the tvOS platform itself. So smooth in operation and uncluttered with garish attention grabbers and poorly designed interfaces. A vastly different experience just watching whatever content you prefer, versus the unintuitive jerkiness of the average streaming stick.

 

[turbineseaplane]

And none of that touches on the user-experience of the tvOS platform itself.

That is a totally separate discussion that has zero to do with the AppleTV+ service

Doesn't belong anywhere in this topic

 

[mazz0]

Plex really is the way to go. Between just a couple of friends libraries and my library, we have over 4,000 movies and hundreds of TV shows. Now, I personally don't pirate anything, but I also don't ask my friends where they got their content. That is their business. If more people set up Plex servers and shared with their friends, less people would feel the need to get ripped off by all these streaming providers.

If you don't pirate anything then what's in your Plex library?

Regardless, setting up, maintaining and populating a Plex server is a hassle. The comment you were responding to, "for the majority, ease of access wins out every time, and this means subscribe & ▶️" absolutely applies.

Actually, I hardly ever watch Apple TV+ except for “Slow Horses” and “For All Mankind”. I think Apple should get out of the production business and just license content. $20M+ in production costs an episode is insane (and sadly it’s not limited to Apple).

I think ATV+ has the highest quality bar of any of the big streamers. It's the only one I'm willing to pay for. Slow Horses and For All Mankind are great, certainly, but there are loads of others.

• Silo
• Severance
• Mr Corman (I absolutely loves that series, such a shame nobody seems to have watched it)
• Dark Matter
• The first season of The Morning Show (but then stop)
• Sugar
• Bad Sisters
• The Big Door Prize
• Prehistoric Planet
• Shining Girls
• Drops of God.

In the second tier, I'd put:

• Hello Tomorrow
• See (just makes it - it's kinda naff, but enjoyably so)
• Invasion (maybe - I can't make my mind up on that)
• Constellation
• The Crowded Room (almost first tier - it gets great, but it's soooo slow to get going)
• Shrinking
• The Changeling
• The Shrink Next Door

I'm looking forward to Pachinko and Sunny too, though I haven't watched them yet.

And since when does a “SEASON” consists of 6 episodes?

The short answer is: when they took the filler out, and or made the episodes longer (and actually shorter series with less filler have long been common outside the US). Episodes now are generally an hour long (or more), while in the broadcast TV days they would often be 45mins (for an hour slot with adverts) or barely more than 20mins for a half-hour slot. I think 6 is still considered quite short, most series I see on Apple TV seem to be 8 to 10. 10 epodes at 1 hour each is 10 hours. 22 (a common season length in the old days) at 45 minutes each is 16.5 hours, so it's not actually much shorter. Slow Horses does have short seasons, but they also seem to churn them out quite quickly.

 

[willzyx]

bro, why. You have so much damn money, why man.