Can't believe I've missed all this fun! My .10 cents...
First, Apple needs a distribution system, end-to-end, from them to the consumer. They may have to rely on others pipes at first, but they'll be planning complete control, old school Apple style. This is, after all, still the same company we know and love. So whether they buy Dish, or partner with ATT or another provider (Sprint just launched their 4G today in several cities) the content will not get "4th party provider taxed," the fourth party being like a Comcast charging outrageously high for internet service.
Second, this probably isn't for the major networks. Not only do they own their content, but they distribute too, for free, over the air. In most major metropolitan areas they even own the stations, so taking their direct revenue is pretty much out of the question. They've just spent a ton of money on HD and the digital switch, they still need to make a lot of that back. So basically, the top content isn't for sale. Plus they're making money from affiliate stations and they don't have to do a relative amount of work to rake this cash in. The OTA system is in place for these guys and they like it. It's their bread and butter and it's not going away anytime soon.
Thirdly, all of the major networks own a ton of content that isn't make them much money on their cable channels. This is the content Apple will be able to distribute, at least at first. The major networks would be able to save a ton of cash by shutting the channels down and just handing Apple a digital file of a finished show. Then you have the content that is making the major networks money. Take Showtime for instance, it's Viacom and Viacom is CBS. It's a pay to view channel already, so why would they care who's paying for it. Give it to Apple, and they might bring in better margins on what they're already doing. This pay to view content is going to be Apple's big push to the consumer.
Fourth, sports. Now we've got a problem. This all depends on the first thing, distribution. Will Apple have the ability to deliver live sports to my living room? Major obstacle, but not insurmountable. Back to the first issue, control the delivery and you can control the content. ESPN 360 comes to mind here. It's distributed by Verizon. Why? 'Cause Verizon's paying them big bucks for these rights. Who pays Verizon, you do. How could Apple rest control from Verizon? By making Disney a lot more money with their other content, like Lifetime. Chances are, Lifetime would make a lot more money by buying individual shows. If you watch these stations, there's hardly any advertising at all, it's just a bunch of back-to-back channel promos, and those don't make money.
Fifth, and finally, who'll be the guinea pig network to "give up" their content. I think it's Disney, for more reasons than just Jobs being on the board. ABC's losing market share everyday. They trend toward a younger demo, who's more likely to give this a shot, and they launched 11 new shows this fall, none of which have gained any traction. They've already delved into the TV/Internet foray with shows like Lost and realized the potential this (for lack of a better word) synergy creates. Disney will consider the internet a "testing ground" and use the iTunes distribution to move shows that become successful to ABC. So take Lifetime again. They create a new show on Lifetime, which would be distributed on iTunes. It does well and appeals to all ranges of women. Now Disney can move that show to ABC and reap the advertising rewards. iTunes becomes the minor leagues for the networks, in a sense. The internet metrics are way better than Nielsen's and they don't have as much to lose from a failed show. Apple doesn't care that the content is gone from iTunes, because 10 other shows will spring up in it's place.
It's gonna happen people. Apple's in the game and there's money to be made...
First, Apple needs a distribution system, end-to-end, from them to the consumer. They may have to rely on others pipes at first, but they'll be planning complete control, old school Apple style. This is, after all, still the same company we know and love. So whether they buy Dish, or partner with ATT or another provider (Sprint just launched their 4G today in several cities) the content will not get "4th party provider taxed," the fourth party being like a Comcast charging outrageously high for internet service.
Second, this probably isn't for the major networks. Not only do they own their content, but they distribute too, for free, over the air. In most major metropolitan areas they even own the stations, so taking their direct revenue is pretty much out of the question. They've just spent a ton of money on HD and the digital switch, they still need to make a lot of that back. So basically, the top content isn't for sale. Plus they're making money from affiliate stations and they don't have to do a relative amount of work to rake this cash in. The OTA system is in place for these guys and they like it. It's their bread and butter and it's not going away anytime soon.
Thirdly, all of the major networks own a ton of content that isn't make them much money on their cable channels. This is the content Apple will be able to distribute, at least at first. The major networks would be able to save a ton of cash by shutting the channels down and just handing Apple a digital file of a finished show. Then you have the content that is making the major networks money. Take Showtime for instance, it's Viacom and Viacom is CBS. It's a pay to view channel already, so why would they care who's paying for it. Give it to Apple, and they might bring in better margins on what they're already doing. This pay to view content is going to be Apple's big push to the consumer.
Fourth, sports. Now we've got a problem. This all depends on the first thing, distribution. Will Apple have the ability to deliver live sports to my living room? Major obstacle, but not insurmountable. Back to the first issue, control the delivery and you can control the content. ESPN 360 comes to mind here. It's distributed by Verizon. Why? 'Cause Verizon's paying them big bucks for these rights. Who pays Verizon, you do. How could Apple rest control from Verizon? By making Disney a lot more money with their other content, like Lifetime. Chances are, Lifetime would make a lot more money by buying individual shows. If you watch these stations, there's hardly any advertising at all, it's just a bunch of back-to-back channel promos, and those don't make money.
Fifth, and finally, who'll be the guinea pig network to "give up" their content. I think it's Disney, for more reasons than just Jobs being on the board. ABC's losing market share everyday. They trend toward a younger demo, who's more likely to give this a shot, and they launched 11 new shows this fall, none of which have gained any traction. They've already delved into the TV/Internet foray with shows like Lost and realized the potential this (for lack of a better word) synergy creates. Disney will consider the internet a "testing ground" and use the iTunes distribution to move shows that become successful to ABC. So take Lifetime again. They create a new show on Lifetime, which would be distributed on iTunes. It does well and appeals to all ranges of women. Now Disney can move that show to ABC and reap the advertising rewards. iTunes becomes the minor leagues for the networks, in a sense. The internet metrics are way better than Nielsen's and they don't have as much to lose from a failed show. Apple doesn't care that the content is gone from iTunes, because 10 other shows will spring up in it's place.
It's gonna happen people. Apple's in the game and there's money to be made...
TV, and the tablet/slate. 
