Apple Reportedly Planning to Release Movies in Theaters and Increase Spend to $1 Billion Per Year

[5105973]

I'm sure the 37 people out there who actually pay for Apple TV+ will be very excited to hear this news!

I’m one of those 37 people and frankly I have conflicted feelings about this news. As iOS and iCloud bugs and snafus increasingly impact my day to day tasks and I’m constantly hearing frustrating news about Apple’s penny pinching and cost cutting and price raising that I feel is negatively impacting consumer experience, I do question news like this.

However, I’m aware that just as most of us can walk and chew gum at the same time, Apple can structure itself to do more than one aspect of its business well. At least I hope so.

But I do wonder what’s going on over there every time I hear they’re putting a billion here, a billion there, and it’s not towards their hardware or what I always thought of as their core business. Like what did their $1 billion investment in Didi Chuxing ultimately gain them and us consumers?

I just wonder how these things pan out once the headlines fade and the returns are tallied up.

 

[WWPD]

I can't wait for the Tim Cook vs Agent Steve Jobs Subway fight.

brought to you by Bing Image Creator AI

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

It would be “on brand” for Apple to focus on high quality productions instead of blockbuster hits, so I’d expect them to continue in that vein.

Personally, I tend to prefer films with substance over high budget movies like Avengers. The larger the budget, the more people moviemakers need to appeal to, which leads to pandering to the lowest common denominator. Apple already does that with the music they promote, so it’s nice they seem to be taking a different approach with TV+.

I appreciate that... but none of the bigger budget studios seek out "low quality" productions because they have a lot more cash to burn. They don't pass on "high quality" because the goal is low quality movie making: "let's leave the best ones for Apple."

They all are hoping to create high-quality, very profitable masterpieces with every dollar they spend. Those with bigger budgets simply have the better opportunity to attract the creative talent to actually make it happen (see the whole AAA games model for example). Yes, Apple is doing just fine with their own creations in terms of critical acclaim & awards, etc but again, I didn't share the post to put down or prop up $1B... just put it in competitive perspective.

 

[compwiz1202]

You need a lot of 6.99 subscribers to make your billion dollars back. I have had at least 3 free trails of up to 5 months each time, I certainly wouldn’t pay for it 12 months a year, though I do sign up for holidays with more free time.

Reminds me my promo ran out a week or two ago. I need to get some Cracker Jacks and hope.

 

[steve09090]

I’m one of those 37 people and frankly I have conflicted feelings about this news. As iOS and iCloud bugs and snafus increasingly impact my day to day tasks and I’m constantly hearing frustrating news about Apple’s penny pinching and cost cutting and price raising that I feel is negatively impacting consumer experience, I do question news like this.

However, I’m aware that just as most of us can walk and chew gum at the same time, Apple can structure itself to do more than one aspect of its business well. At least I hope so.

But I do wonder what’s going on over there every time I hear they’re putting a billion here, a billion there, and it’s not towards their hardware or what I always thought of as their core business. Like what did their $1 billion investment in Didi Chuxing ultimately gain them and us consumers?

I just wonder how these things pan out once the headlines fade and the returns are tallied up.

Hey, me too! I thought with 7 billion people in this world I would never find out who else was!

As far as bugs go, I don't think they are any worse than any other company. We just focus on Apple because we expect them to be perfect. Like any prudent business, they need to cut spending on occasion. I mean governments do it all the time and they aren't there to please shareholders.

Billions here and there are supporting their business and keeping them thriving without cutting employees like every other tech company is.

 

[StudioMacs]

I appreciate that... but none of the bigger budget studios seek out "low quality" productions because they have a lot more cash to burn. They don't pass on "high quality" because the goal is low quality movie making: "let's leave the best ones for Apple."

They all are hoping to create high-quality, very profitable masterpieces with every dollar they spend. Those with bigger budgets simply have the better opportunity to attract the creative talent to actually make it happen (see the whole AAA games model for example). Yes, Apple is doing just fine with their own creations in terms of critical acclaim & awards, etc but again, I didn't share the post to put down or prop up $1B... just put it in competitive perspective.

When a studio green lights a $200 million movie, they expect to appeal to a wider audience. This means lowering the bar to have mass appeal.

 

[smaffei]

I remember the days when Apple was focused on making insanely great products instead of mediocre TV shows and movies…

Can we get that back?!?

 

[ProfessionalFan]

I remember the days when Apple was focused on making insanely great products instead of mediocre TV shows and movies…

Can we get that back?!?

They are trying to make their services division bigger and bigger. The days of them being a primarily hardware focused company are over and not likely ever coming back.

 

[smaffei]

They are trying to make their services division bigger and bigger. The days of them being a primarily hardware focused company are over and not likely ever coming back.

You're right, of course. Sadly.

 

[steve09090]

I remember the days when Apple was focused on making insanely great products instead of mediocre TV shows and movies…

Can we get that back?!?

The only reason their products aren't considered "insanely good" is because they are lost in the huge number of products that copy them.

With regard to mediocre TV Shows and movies, that's just a matter of taste, and they have made some pretty darn top-class movies and TV Shows. It's all dependent on your taste, and particularly bias.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

When a studio green lights a $200 million movie, they expect to appeal to a wider audience. This means lowering the bar to have mass appeal.

Ahhh, I see... so they cut their quality target to maximize revenue & profit. Fortunately, Apple is well known to choose the low revenue & low profit options to keep quality high.

 

[AppleTO]

Probably an unpopular opinion, but I wish Apple would get out of film and TV and focus on computers. Like, other than money, why is a computer company doing any of this? Lol

 

[kiranmk2]

I wonder if Apple TV+ is profitable yet? I'm guessing not given the number of free trials being handed out.

 

[Kar98]

“Spend” is a noun now? Well this is the dumb.

 

[getmac]

Probably an unpopular opinion, but I wish Apple would get out of film and TV and focus on computers. Like, other than money, why is a computer company doing any of this? Lol

Hate to break it to you, but it has been well over a decade since they have been a computer company.

 

[bluecoast]

The only reason I can see for ATV+, is to provide VR enabled content for Apple's AVR hardware product. <<< This is probably the main reason, we just don't know it yet.

And/or if Apple announce that there's an ad-supported tier - or its completely free - so they sell large amount of ad inventory.

Otherwise, I just can't believe the amount of people who pay for ATV+, is justifying its expense.

If Apple has cash to throw around, it would probably be better off using it getting all its manufacturing away from China before things really hit the fan & on AI (one word: 'Siri').

 

[tubular]

Netflix probably spent $300M on Martin Scorsese’s “The Irishman“ a few years back. They don’t do that sort of thing anymore.

The problem with producing movies is that it’s risky. The bigger the budget, the bigger the risk.

 

[KENESS]

Apple is purportedly looking to third-party studios owing to its lack of expertise in movie distribution across thousands of cinemas worldwide, but it has concerns around the hefty fees and marketing budgets that such partners would demand.

Just buy one of the smaller-but-capable studios and go from there.

It's such an easy solution when it's not my money and not my risky undertaking...

 

[citysnaps]

Or Ol' Timmy wants a seat at the Oscars...

Does that irritate you?

If so, why?

 

[skiguy45]

What makes a film eligible for the Oscars?

Eligibility rules vary by award (e.g. rules for shorts are slightly different) and are tweaked from year to year, but here's the rules for the 95th Oscars. See Rule #2 for top line rules and later sections for award specific rules.

https://www.oscars.org/sites/oscars/files/95th_oscars_complete_rules.pdf

 

[a m u n]

$1 Billion is a big amount of cash... except in the movie making business. To put it in perspective, Black Adam had a $260 million budget, so $1 Billion could fund about 3 Black Adam movies. A much bigger success like Avengers: Endgame is believed to have a budget of about $400M. Avatar: The Way of Water is believed to have a budget of about $450M. If so, $1 Billion could make about 2 of that quality of movie(s).

On the other hand, Best Picture Winner The Whale is believed to have a budget of only about $1.5M, so $1 Billion could fund a very high volume of "Best Picture" movies like that one.

Try a search like "How much does Disney spend on making movies each year?" to get a corporate level, relative perspective. Do the same for Paramount and the other studios that make some movies that you actually like to watch.

None of that is necessarily arguing that Apple needs to spend more or less than $1B- just offered to put some perspective to what can read like a big (or not big) number in the headline.

 

[sunapple]

Probably an unpopular opinion, but I wish Apple would get out of film and TV and focus on computers. Like, other than money, why is a computer company doing any of this? Lol

My guess is that they probably don’t affect each other. Yes, I subscribe to the focus strategy, but Apple isn’t in financial trouble like they were in the 90s. However, I agree that this business is a stretch from their core business even if you can watch the movies on their devices.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Can I please get a 15” MBA and new iPhone Mini before you fully morph into Paramount Pictures, or Sony Music? …. Or whatever you are doing here now..

 

[ProfessionalFan]

“Spend” is a noun now? Well this is the dumb.

There is nothing new or incorrect about the headline. It has always been the proper way of phrasing that.

 

[Nuno Lopes]

They are trying to make their services division bigger and bigger. The days of them being a primarily hardware focused company are over and not likely ever coming back.

Yeah. I'm even thinking about cancelling the TV+ subscription ... With Netflix, Disney+, HBO, Showtime and Amazon Prime ... we simply find it not that interesting. Apart from Foundation ... which last episode was 1.5 years ago and TED at a lesser degree ... nothing on it appeals my family.

Honestly I don't see what in the world is Apple or Amazon for that matter are contributing in this space apart having large pockets. Why do tech companies that don't know what to do with so much money always come to this. Microsoft once was on it ... glad they have backtracked.