Apple to Offer 99-Cent TV Show Rentals?

[MattInOz]

Must remember when reading any macrumors headline to add the tag "in the USA" and half the sentences.

The price doesn't seem so bad for a one off episode but would seem a bit rich for a whole season of rented tv. seeing as this is a small leak rumour there is hope that they will offer season passes at a lower rate or even catch up packs.
Better still a "love it/own it" options.

From what Apple said about why subscription models fail in music. Most of that is reversed for Video and TV so why not do different model for different media.

Although Apple really doesn't need to change their "own it" model just allow/encourage other models via the appstore. Then sell iAds to the shows makers to allow in app purchase of iTunesStore content.

 

[deannnnn]

Why would I pay for something that I could have for free?
DVR, Hulu (and other similar sites), OnDemand from your cable company.
No reason to pay for a rental. Paying to own I can understand.

 

[bretm]

I only watch about 10 television shows on any regular basis. At .99 cents, at an average of 4 episodes per month, that's still cheaper than the $65 I'm sending to Time Warner each month. That's if the shows I watch will be available. Still no Big Bang Theory on iTunes, for example.

The Big Bang Theory is free every week in HD right off the antenna. Plug that antenna into a DVR and wait 10 minutes to start watching and you can skip the commercials.

Isn't the bigger problem with all this Internet TV discovery? How do you learn what shows you'd like to watch without a little surfing.

For the masses this is going to be a slow evolution.

 

[lpolarityl]

99 cents an episode. That is 22 bucks a season per show? What a rip off. No thanks. I think a subscription, watch all you want Netflix type model, is more to my liking. Ill wait.

Doesn't it normally cost $39-49 for a season DVD set? $22 sounds fair to me. The thing with NetFlix is, you have to wait until it comes on DVD before you can rent it. With the iTV service, its available the day it is broadcasted, but you can watch it at your leisure, or the day it comes out.

I do agree though, a subscription plan would be really nice. I'd pay $19-29 a month if the variety was there, gotta have sports though!

 

[lilo777]

Maybe you are going to call me crazy, but I pay $160.00 monthly for Verizon FiOS, The things I really want to watch I always record them by schedule in my DVR (included with FiOS) at the end of the month I have 10 TV shows and 5 Movies from HBO or STARS. If I do the math right... .99 cents per episode and 4.99 per movie.... it means less than $30.00 dollars for a whole month of entertainment versus a $160.00 for a bunch of channels and movie channels that I really didn't saw.

In my Book, if I can have an iTV and pay a buck for every show or movie it will be waaayyyy better than this slavery I'm used to.

I will buy an iTV right away and I will be very happy.

So, you watch 5 movies (10 hours) and 10 shows (about 8 hours) per month. It's about 36 minutes per day. Are you sure you did not forget something? Good for you anyways , it's just this probably will not work for most of us.

 

[PodPacker]

This is Plain Stupid

So in actuality, Apple is just lowering it's TV show prices. TV needs a change it is a dinosaur. TV execs needs to be weeded out already and some fresh blood should take over. I am not talking about 40 years wandering around in the desert. I mean heads on a chopping block and entirely new, untarnished management be put in place. Enough is enough. Cable TV is a monopoly the same as the phone companies. Vonage and the others have revolutionized the phone, we need that to happen with TV.

 

[KnightWRX]

Maybe you have super-cheap cable or watch a lot more shows than I, but for me this option would be FAR cheaper than cable. (And my rabbit ears don’t pick up everything.)

A typical American show is about 22 episodes per year. Follow ten shows religiously and you’d spend $220.

Cable is 30$ a month around here. Also, you're not counting channel surfing or the occasional cable movie on a slow sunday/saturday.

My GF watches about 3 hours of TV per day, that's 6 half hour shows. She watches the reruns too and you'd have to pay again to see those.

Seriously, .99$ rentals is a rip off. .99$ to own is better. Hulu and Netflix unlimited streaming for 10$ a month is much better.

 

[MacKeeperFanMod]

I'm not sure where I read this, but apparently the content providers are more scared of the accurate metrics that iTV, iTunes, Google TV, etc. are going to provide. The current system allows them to basically estimate their show viewership, which they are basing their advertising rates on.

This has been the one of the reasons they are against the a-la-carte method, less channels means these room to fake data and hence the "inflated" price they keep saying they would have to charge people for doing it this way.

 

[MarkSF]

I dropped Comcast altogether and have been fairly happy with my $50 Radio Shack HD antennae. I pick up the local stations fine, but I miss HBO.

I got an older model, but basically the same features as this.

So of course I don't want to pay anything for local TV channels. But .99 HBO and Showtime shows and 1.99 movies would definitely draw me to the iToob.

 

[NinjaHERO]

Doesn't it normally cost $39-49 for a season DVD set? $22 sounds fair to me. The thing with NetFlix is, you have to wait until it comes on DVD before you can rent it. With the iTV service, its available the day it is broadcasted, but you can watch it at your leisure, or the day it comes out.

I do agree though, a subscription plan would be really nice. I'd pay $19-29 a month if the variety was there, gotta have sports though!

The problem with that argument is the idea that I buy DVDs. I don't. No reason too. Netflix gives me every DVD I could ever want for less than the price of one movie a month. A waste of money to buy tv seasons.

So 22 is still really high to me. 10 bucks for a season pass to a show, maybe.

 

[I WAS the one]

You really are Crazy.

It sounds like you have way more content being delivered than what you use.

true. I'm a movies kind a guy, and for that reason I want to have available all the premium channels... but iTV sounds like an alternative.

 

[I WAS the one]

So, you watch 5 movies (10 hours) and 10 shows (about 8 hours) per month. It's about 36 minutes per day. Are you sure you did not forget something? Good for you anyways , it's just this probably will not work for most of us.

you are right. I work too much and I have a couple of days for my entertainment, that's why I record all my shows and movies on my DVR. iTV is an alternative.

 

[kirk26]

.99 cents is nothing. Stop whining girlie men.

 

[DylanLikesPorn]

Fning Classic dude!

haha **** that is from robocop. nice!

 

[Tor Eckman]

I would not pay .99 per episode to rent a tv show. Apple needs to get some of the networks on board and get some kind of monthly subscriptions thing like netflix or iTV is pointless.

 

[skellener]

$.99 is too expensive if you want people to fundamentally shift their wathcing habits.

Hour shows ( ~45 min to 60 min ) should be $.79 possibly up to $.99
half hour shows should be $.49

Hour long shows are 44 minutes long without commercials.
Half hour shows are 22 minutes without commercials.
Adult Swim (15min) shows are 11 without commercials.

Some networks don't follow this pattern but in general, this is it.

Yes, I'd like to see half-off if you subscribe up front for the season ahead of time.

 

[hugodrax]

Lets see, one show plays 4 times a week. so 4 bucks.

If you have 2-3 shows you follow on a monthly basis it would run 8 bucks to 12 bucks a month.

Cheaper than cable, basic cable is like 40 a month.

Most of the stuff on TV is reality TV ****, religion and infomercials.

With Netflix for streaming movies/DVDs and this iTV thing you can get more bang for the buck.

Your news on the internet, with less filler.

 

[Rocketman]

99 cents per show whether 30 or 60 minutes (with commercials) is VASTLY more expensive than cable, satellite, premium services, and even some PPV bulk services.

It "pencils".

Broadcast TV, while extinct, was FREE!! 480i, from a geographically locked position on a device the size of a microwave oven, rocks!

Rocketman

 

[Peace]

Speaking for myself only this would be a lot cheaper than cable.

I spend around $100 a month for expanded cable service from Comcast. I watch around 10 shows each week all the time. I do watch something different if it pops up on cable but that's not very often.

If I paid $.99 per show that's $9.99 a week which is about $40 a month. This would be a savings of $60 a month for me.

But I'm not a typical TV viewer I guess.

 

[keypox]

Why would I pay for something that I could have for free?
DVR, Hulu (and other similar sites), OnDemand from your cable company.
No reason to pay for a rental. Paying to own I can understand.

Because when apple starts doing it and apple zealots starting paying. Hulu and others will try to do the same. There wont be any free anymore.

Its another reason apple doesnt embrace flash. Build that ipad, iphone and other icrap base, so they control what you can and can't have.

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

haha **** that is from robocop. nice!

I went walking around the office saying, "I'd buy that for a dollar!" and people started cracking the f#$k up. Such a great movie.

 

[Tor Eckman]

Because when apple starts doing it and apple zealots starting paying. Hulu and others will try to do the same. There wont be any free anymore.

Its another reason apple doesnt embrace flash. Build that ipad, iphone and other icrap base, so they control what you can and can't have.

If all apple has is rented (a' la carte style) tv shows and movies, there will not be enough zealots to support it. That is a seriously lame idea that I would never pay for, and I can not imagine others paying for. Netflix is a much better deal!

 

[kryptonianjorel]

This sounds like an awful idea. First of all, its just another release window problem. Why should the shows be delayed after their broadcast? This cripples their revenue stream. Anyone with cable or satellite can just record these shows on their vcr or dvr. If I'm interested in staying very current with a show, I will watch it live, or torrent it within 10 minutes of its broadcast's end.

Second issue, rental. Why would I spend $.99 for something I can only rent for 48 hours! Full DVD seasons are released for a price around $40-$50, and drop to $20 after a few years, when on sale. Older shows would not be worth watching via this method, as buying the DVD set would be more cost effective (remember, the DVD can be resold and the cost recouped!) For $.99, 30 or 60 days should be the rental time, at least, so I can watch, and rewatch the show if I chose to.

Third issue, why. Why rent when I can buy, or even better, torrent? Why impose artificial limitations on my viewing when they are uncomfortable for me?

I'm sure many people will make a lot of money on this, and that a lot of people will love it, but there are better ways of doing this

 

[PeterQVenkman]

How exactly do you compare the prices? Let's say a family has cable service and watches TV, say, 4 hours per day (we all know it's way more on average).

So it's 4 * 30 = 120 hours. It's an eqiuvalent of 120 to 240 shows (depending on show length). Aplpe will charge you way more than Comcast.

In that case, that family would stay with cable and internet to save money instead of Apple TV downloads. For them nothing changes - but they still might turn to Apple for the odd program here and there. "Dang, forgot to DVR madmen last night... I guess I can just rent it for 99 cents from Apple right now instead of waiting for it to air again."

Apple gets the occasional purchase from them - which is still more than they used to get!

For a single person who only watches a couple of shows, it gives them a reason to cancel TV service and rely on the free content (as you point out below), OTA, or internet rentable content.

At the same time, one can watch most of these shows for free from web sites (Fox, ABC etc.).

The broadcast sites usually have their stuff online - people can get that with an antenna anyway. Not the cable networks, though. They are much less common and more afraid of this new fangled internet!

Between Comcast (quality) and web sites (free), I am not sure Apple has any wiggle room with this pricing.

I'm with you on this - I think Apple's got to be really careful. I don't know what Apple is planning, or why they are doing what they are, but I think Apple's magic "99 cent" pricing for everything is dangerous. Somehow I think in the fight between Apple and everyone else we'll get screwed in the middle! We'll all end up getting tons of ads, I'm sure.

Second issue, rental. Why would I spend $.99 for something I can only rent for 48 hours! Full DVD seasons are released for a price around $40-$50, and drop to $20 after a few years, when on sale. Older shows would not be worth watching via this method, as buying the DVD set would be more cost effective (remember, the DVD can be resold and the cost recouped!) For $.99, 30 or 60 days should be the rental time, at least, so I can watch, and rewatch the show if I chose to.

instant gratification. Get it when you want it, not when it drops in price a few years later.

Third issue, why. Why rent when I can buy, or even better, torrent? Why impose artificial limitations on my viewing when they are uncomfortable for me?

Concessions to the TV companies/content developers. It's not to benefit us, that's for sure. It's to keep the network heads happy.

I'm sure many people will make a lot of money on this, and that a lot of people will love it, but there are better ways of doing this

Yup. I'm reminded of what the iTunes store (music) was like when it launched versus what it is now. Apple's blazing new territory and companies are nervous to follow, so they will only dip their toe in the water. If it seems inviting, they may actually got for a swim.

 

[jaswaters]

Huge Potential

I think some people are missing the potential behind the iTV. If, and this is a big if, Apple is able to offer a large selection of network and cable shows in HD, commercial free, on demand, and within 24 hours of the original broadcast, they will have a winner on their hands. What legal service offers all of these things? That's right...not a single one.

On top of that, it is essentially confirmed that the player will have a version of iOS, which means apps. I don't think it is a stretch to assume that we will see apps from Hulu, Netflix, CNN, etc. on the iTV. So even if you never buy/rent a single episode from iTunes, you essentially have a RokuHD on your hands, which happens to be the best selling media streaming device on Amazon at $99. This has the potential to be huge...