Apple Reportedly Considering Extending Apple TV+ Free Trial

[jhollington]

I made it through the first 2 episodes (I think). It probably would have resonated better for me if the writers didn’t feel a need to inject so much cursing into the dialogue. It got old very quick. A lot fo writers do that to try and mask a very weak and often cliched story line.

Yeah, I didn't like the excessive language either, but I just shrugged it off as probably realistic for what life at a major network TV show is actually like.

However, the real problem is that The Morning Show spent a lot of expository time on the first 2-3 episodes. I had to tough it through the first couple of episodes as well, but by episode four it really picked up, and trust me it wasn't a weak storyline by any stretch. In fact, if you read some of the reviews it seems that many of the critics said much the same thing... Some reviewers really panned after the first 3 or 4 episodes, but then came back later and admitted they were totally wrong after watching the whole thing. Stuart Heritage's review in The Guardian especially sticks out in my mind, and I think he completely nailed it.

 

[Apple_Robert]

Yeah, I didn't like the excessive language either, but I just shrugged it off as probably realistic for what life at a major network TV show is actually like.

However, the real problem is that The Morning Show spent a lot of expository time on the first 2-3 episodes. I had to tough it through the first couple of episodes as well, but by episode four it really picked up, and trust me it wasn't a weak storyline by any stretch. In fact, if you read some of the reviews it seems that many of the critics said much the same thing... Some reviewers really panned after the first 3 or 4 episodes, but then came back later and admitted they were totally wrong after watching the whole thing. Stuart Heritage's review in The Guardian especially sticks out in my mind, and I think he completely nailed it.

I will give it another try and see what happens.

 

[SaxPlayer]

For those LG TV owners who are a bit annoyed that AppleTV+ isn't available for their pre-2018 sets, I'll direct you to this new thread I've just created in the AppleTV+ forum:

LG TV owners with 2017 or older models MUST READ THIS!

I've been pretty annoyed that the AppleTV+ app isn't available for 2017 or older LG TV sets. There's no reason why these sets can't run the app. My 55" C7 OLED is capable of displaying Netflix Dolby Vision and has seen updates recently to add both BritBox and Disney+. I contacted LG directly to...

forums.macrumors.com

 

[PaulpBenitti]

This is actually a very serious allegation. Do you have a source for it?

Apple. They're not hiding it. Hiding it would be illegal.

 

[jhollington]

Apple. They're not hiding it. Hiding it would be illegal.

I can only assume that you misunderstand what Apple has said or that you’ve misunderstood what I’m saying. Maybe we’re actually both saying the same thing in two different ways 😏

Apple has never said that they are allocating money to Apple TV+ from every single iPhone or other eligible piece of Apple hardware sold. That would still be lying to investors, and admitting you’re telling a lie doesn’t make any less illegal.

What Apple has clearly said, and every other financial analyst who has spoken about it has confirmed (see the Barrons link above) is that Apple is only reallocating revenue from devices purchased by those who actually signed up for the free year of service. At that point, Apple considers them as having “paid” for the service as part of their hardware purchase, and moves the appropriate amount over to account for that person’s free Apple TV+ subscription.

This is how the Barrons analyst in the report above was able to estimate that only 10% of new iPhone buyers actually signed up for the free year of Apple TV+. Apple has not disclosed any revenue or subscriber numbers at all so far.

I apologize if I misunderstood your original comment, but it definitely sounded like you were suggesting that Apple was reporting Apple TV+ revenue from every hardware device sold, even to folks who have never heard of Apple TV+. That would obviously be unethical, but also fraudulent under securities law. Apple has a duty to its investors to report revenue as accurately as possible, and they pay a lot of money to accountants and lawyers to make sure they’re doing this right.

 

[SeperateLayer]

Not true. I’ve surveyed everyone. Most want to pay for it.

How could you survey everyone?

 

[PaulpBenitti]

I can only assume that you misunderstand what Apple has said or that you’ve misunderstood what I’m saying. Maybe we’re actually both saying the same thing in two different ways 😏

Apple has never said that they are allocating money to Apple TV+ from every single iPhone or other eligible piece of Apple hardware sold. That would still be lying to investors, and admitting you’re telling a lie doesn’t make any less illegal.

What Apple has clearly said, and every other financial analyst who has spoken about it has confirmed (see the Barrons link above) is that Apple is only reallocating revenue from devices purchased by those who actually signed up for the free year of service. At that point, Apple considers them as having “paid” for the service as part of their hardware purchase, and moves the appropriate amount over to account for that person’s free Apple TV+ subscription.

This is how the Barrons analyst in the report above was able to estimate that only 10% of new iPhone buyers actually signed up for the free year of Apple TV+. Apple has not disclosed any revenue or subscriber numbers at all so far.

I apologize if I misunderstood your original comment, but it definitely sounded like you were suggesting that Apple was reporting Apple TV+ revenue from every hardware device sold, even to folks who have never heard of Apple TV+. That would obviously be unethical, but also fraudulent under securities law. Apple has a duty to its investors to report revenue as accurately as possible, and they pay a lot of money to accountants and lawyers to make sure they’re doing this right.

We're both talking about the exact same thing. We're on the exact same page.

And I'm talking about how this reallocation of $60 from over here to over there creates a completely superfluous and fraudulent view of services in general, AppleTV+ as an endeavor, and the streaming market as a whole.

iPhone revenue is so vast that no one misses the $60. It doesn't affect the bottom line meaningfully in that category.

But what it does to services is much more significant. Apple has put tons of effort into increasing services revenue, and reporting every free year of Apple TV+ as $60 of services revenue bolsters that bottom line artificially.

Furthermore, AppleTV+ is a very, very questionable endeavor: creating a streaming service comprised entirely of a handful of originals that no one asked for and no one wants to watch, and dumping a few billion into it to make it happen, is more than just risky... its insane. It was never what Apple TV+ was intended to be. It was Apple's desperate last grasp after spending 5+ years negotiating for (and failing to get) streaming rights to the iTunes Movie and TV store content (which is what customers actually wanted). Pretending that AppleTV+ is "selling" with this reallocation is a pathetic attempt to legitimize the service that never should have launched in the first place.

And this artificial legitimization is the last thing the streaming market needs right now. The overall direction of the streaming market is something that desperately needs a stock take and a reboot, and having poor efforts like AppleTV+ fake-succeed (instead of being allow to flop as it would) is not helpful to the current situation in the industry, where every company with an intellectual property license thinks they can launch a streaming service (*cough* Peacock *cough*).