Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How could I...???

"I called my congressman
and he said, quote
'I'd like to help you son
but you're too young to vote.'"

--The Who
(Summertime blues)

Yes the Who covered it but is was written by Eddie Cochran and Jerry Capehart. Originally recorded by Eddie Cichran and still the best version. Although Blue Cheer's version is a great first Heavy Metal Psychedelic triumph!
I'm more than a little embarrased here. I cut my R&R teeth on "Rock around the clock," and probably had original disc of Summertime Blues you mentioned, plus I reviewed a Blue Cheer concert where they played the way amped up version for a local hippie rag at the time. I seem to recall writing something like, "Blue Cheer is to music what a sledgehammer is to a nail. They get the job done in whomping good fashion, with joyfully aggressive overkill."

Still, in defense, the Who's version on Live at Leeds helped get it, if I'm not mistaken again, Rolling Stones' "best Rock and Roll album ever" review (or "best live" or "one of the ten best" or something like that) back in the day, and is hardly a shabby cover...

Thanks for the correction!!.

As for the previous poster's note about the "contact us" link, there is both a "feedback" and "contact us" link on the first NBC page, and "feedback" at least in my case, caught the eye first. And even when I clicked on "contact us," the most obvious thing on THAT page also took you to the survey. It was: "Want to voice your opinions...." (on NBC shows)?

In order to send an actual note, I had to click on "Questions not found on FAQ page about NBC Entertainment programming? Email us using the pulldown menu below:" Then I had to select A show -- I chose Heroes as I figured it was one of the most downloaded and finally got to give 'em an earful.
 
No good shows?

hahaha.. good thing NBC blows and has no shows that are even worth watching.
It wasn't covered in the article but NBC/Universal owns many cable nets, including, the SciFi network ("Battlestar Galactica," being one show that might have some fans in this thread) and perhaps others you might care about. Wikipedia "NBC/Universal" for a complete list.

So it's logical to at least speculate if the ITMS is also giving up all NBC/Universal content, rather than just NBC net shows.

And contrary to what YOU might think is worth watching, 30% of the downloaded TV shows on ITMS were of NBC origin, though I'm not sure if that includes all their associated properties.

Other posters have said it's NBC's right in a private economy to charge whatever they think the market will bear, and I don't disagree, but being the market that has to bear it, we have a say in the workings of the market economy, and we can choose, en masse, to not fill our shopping carts with waay overpriced products, unless we're "sheeple" rather than people.

So without whining about "fairness," and what NBC (or Apple) "should do," we can still fight back from our end of the buyers and sellers continuum. Capitalism 101: If nobody buys your frakkin' product, you will lose money until a) you improve the product (or dazzle folk with marketing and advertising tools, e.g., people do buy BOSE products even at the prices they charge), b) you charge what people ARE willing to pay, or c) you have to abandon the product 'cos your strategy just ain't flyin.
 
This all goes back to the "No Universal, our customers aren't music pirates and we're not paying you $1 per iPod we sale to help defray some cost you think you're owed" situation back when MS agreed to it with their Zune. I suppose Universal had already spent Microsoft's $50 kickback and weren't satisified with it and so, tried to shake Apple down. When they wouldn't agree to the mob-like extortion, then Universal decided to make sure that anything related to them, NBC, etc. would be gone. Good riddance. Without Will & Grace or Third Watch on iTunes, I couldn't care less.
 
I think NBC (Universal) is going to be the bigger loser in this ultimately, though, I would caution Apple not to display too much hubris going forward, because there is a growing perception that partnerships with Apple benefit Apple more than anyone else. I'm not saying that this is the case here, but it's the perception that counts. In that regard, Apple's press release was a wise and timely move.

I still wonder if Apple should not have just bitten the bullet on this one. For one thing, NBC could not have honestly wanted there episodes going for $4.99 while every other network remained at $1.99. It sounds like it was the first move in a game of hardball negotiating that Apple was simply not willing to entertain. In terms of big picture though, Apple could have afforded to take less profit, or even a slight loss, because they are not really in the business of selling music and tv shows, they are in the business of making iPods (and Macs, and iPhones...and one day AppleTVs). iTunes only exists to support the realm of downloadable content, because the more people there are out there downloading music and video, the more iPods Apple is going to sell. Let's face it, if I'm going to watch video on the go I'm probably going to do it on an iPod. As a percentage of revenue, everything Apple makes off of iTunes is pocket change, so why they would want to play hardball with profit sharing kind of confuses me. They are going to punish NBC over this, and have them come back with their tails between their legs, but it'll probably just make other content providers nervous about who they are currently in bed with, and thus explore the option of other alternatives.

In any event, NBC should have known better. For one thing they got a hell of a lot of free advertising through iTunes, and I am almost certain that shows like Heroes would not have been as successful had it not been for iTunes, and people's ability to catch up on eps they missed, or get into the show late into the season. They are completely overplaying their hand, but I guess my point is, so might Apple...

I have to agree, however there is one thing I think that we're all missing here, or that's so obvious we've all just failed to mention it.

The fact of the matter is we all operate under a budget of how much we're willing to spend through ITS. In retrospect, there have been numerous instances within the last year where I've had the inclination to purchase shows such as House, M.D. and others but refrained from doing so because I was committed to Heroes, the Office and Scrubs, all for season passes. Then it occurred to me this morning,"Hey, now i can buy House and other shows and just use 'other means' of getting my heroes, office and scrubs fix".

The point is that I'm going to spend a certain amount of money thru itunes cause there is enough 'product' that I want therein. Normally I would have remained committed to the aforementioned NBC shows but since said company has decided that reaching a market consisting of tens of millions loyal consumers was unnecessary, I'll take my money elsewhere.

Oh, and while NBC shows comprised 30% of television shows sold thru itunes, their primetime ratings produced only two in the top 20 (Deal or No Deal and Sunday Night Football) for the 2006-07 season. I say again, smart move NBC!
 
I'm sorry,but...

I'm with those that are against NBC.

I am an alumni and employee of Virginia Tech and NBC received and aired the Cho video, and frankly they can all go to [that really hot place] for doing so. I would protest Apple distributing their content anyway. As a stock holder, I am glad that these negotiations went awry.

I refuse to watch NBC until their management resigns or retires that were in office during the events of April 16, 2007.
 
guys, this is all about Apple's arrogant way of doing business. Telling other companies the ONLY way they will sell Music or Video content.

Other companies are fed up with this, and to be blunt, it can be solved, but would need Apple to compromise.

Unfortunately, I don't believe Steve Jobs will. Compromise would do wonders for getting tons more content onto Apple platforms and stores.
 
guys, this is all about Apple's arrogant way of doing business. Telling other companies the ONLY way they will sell Music or Video content.

Other companies are fed up with this, and to be blunt, it can be solved, but would need Apple to compromise.

Unfortunately, I don't believe Steve Jobs will. Compromise would do wonders for getting tons more content onto Apple platforms and stores.

So all this time you've been under the impression that people should be paying MORE for ITMS content (say, 4.99 for a tv show)?

Looks like NBC has at least one person who'll go subscribe to their upcoming online store. Now if they could only get 9,999,999 more....
 
I really can't see how this will do anything but encourage piracy. It seems that NBC would have settled for $1.99/show instead of $0/show.

I don't buy video content from iTMS (no subtitles/captions and I'm hearing impaired) but I know plenty of people who do, a lot of whom buy entire seasons of NBC shows. That's a lot of money for the network to lose.
 
guys, this is all about Apple's arrogant way of doing business. Telling other companies the ONLY way they will sell Music or Video content.
Just FWIW, one key reason iTunes is successful is they fact that it is one size fits all. The Apple arrogance you are referring to translates directly to simplicity for the user.

I know what to expect when buying from iTMS $0.99/$9.99 for tracks and albums and $1.99/$9.99 for movies. (Yes there are some exceptions for new movies & albums and iTunes Plus). I really don't want to see tracks priced at anywhere from $0.79-$1.59. This kind of random pricing has the wonderful effect of stopping customers (well me at least) from an impulse buy. Hmm. It's $1.59, maybe I can find it cheaper elsewhere.

I definitely don't want to be subjected to the same kind of "bundling" of content that the content provides subject the cable companies to. (You can only have USA if you also buy SciFi, Bravo, CNBC, ...). This is about the same kind of nonsense that drove the music business to ruin. "Yeah sure I'll sell you a song you like, but you have to take these 15 tracks of filler garbage along with the single you want."

From all accounts this was one of NBC's key demands of iTunes. The ability to bundle videos. Do you really want to be forced to take "Dateline" along with your "Battlestar Galactica"?

B
 
So all this time you've been under the impression that people should be paying MORE for ITMS content (say, 4.99 for a tv show)?

Looks like NBC has at least one person who'll go subscribe to their upcoming online store. Now if they could only get 9,999,999 more....

no one thinks that is the real price a company would sell say an episode of battlestar galactica.

why shouldn't it be the price of say a PBS show that if you ordered via pbs would be $19.99 or $25 on dvd.

all of this stuff should be negotiable with Apple, but they treat content companies poorly and tell them there is one way to sell on itunes, the Apple price structure.

Sorry, this is a losing argument, as Apple is going to need the content companies more than they need Apple.

this is just the start of People speaking up about Apple.

Many creative companies have harsher feelings about Apple's corporate tactics than the people who hate Microsoft here.
 
why shouldn't it be the price of say a PBS show that if you ordered via pbs would be $19.99 or $25 on dvd.
FWIW NOVA is $7.99/show on iTunes, though you can get the whole season for $30. Apparently PBS is a better negotiator than NBC!

You don't happen to work for the peacock do you? :p

B
 
this is just the start of People speaking up about Apple.

Many creative companies have harsher feelings about Apple's corporate tactics than the people who hate Microsoft here.

What software companies feel about Apple is not relevant- that should not lead to unadulterated applause for NBC for "taking Apple on."

Apple, most people would say, is far less draconian in dealing with competitors than Microsoft. Have Apple's tactics hurt small companies? Certainly! That is the nature of competition and especially so when Apple has often had to come from a very disadvantaged position in the computing world. Examples like Sherlock and competitors etc. are just how it is!

In any case, NBC has picked the wrong battle-field and the wrong adversary. This is not going to lead to a watershed event where everyone abandons Apple and it is left with no video or audio content on iTunes---so NBC are (I detest singular plurals) going to come off looking like the greedy dolts they are.

So, well done Vivendi/Universal chimera-- your profits are down over 40% this year and you have chosen the same wrong course, again. The definition of insanity! Sail on guys-- the falls are just ahead.
 
no one thinks that is the real price a company would sell say an episode of battlestar galactica.

why shouldn't it be the price of say a PBS show that if you ordered via pbs would be $19.99 or $25 on dvd.

all of this stuff should be negotiable with Apple, but they treat content companies poorly and tell them there is one way to sell on itunes, the Apple price structure.

Sorry, this is a losing argument, as Apple is going to need the content companies more than they need Apple.

this is just the start of People speaking up about Apple.

Many creative companies have harsher feelings about Apple's corporate tactics than the people who hate Microsoft here.

Please, you make the 'content companies' sound like little raggamuffin, orphaned children who spend their days singing 'it's a hard knock life for us'.

The truth is quite the opposite, where consumers have overpayed for underdeveloped products such as cd's, dvd's and other forms of media for years. Apple's hard line of consumer friendly standardization of product benefits the masses substantially more than did the economic golden age of entertainment media during the late 80's and 90's. However, the change is not so significant that we should begin to feel even an inkling of sympathy for companies such as NBC-Universal who appear to be retracting their product out of bitterness and discontentment, much like a spoiled, dejected child who whimpers all the way home with HIS ball and HIS bat.

ITS is going nowhere, simply because prices are fair and products are delivered fast and met with great satisfaction. NBC will be hard pressed to find another medium by which they can reach as many consumers AND do so with as great success as Apple's ITS has.
 
Chill!!
1. It does not make someone a troll purely because you don't agree with what they think. You have a difference of opinion.
No, a troll is someone who goes out of his/her way to express a strong opinion (usually counter to the spirit of a particular venue), and does not rely on logic, but emotional rhetoric and name calling to tout their points. I don't call someone a troll lightly, but when the shoe fits, I'm not being pulled in by one. I'm not the only one to note that the remarks were overboard. Calling the person "naive" is not an insult, it just means they are expressing an opinion without being aware (or even addressing) many of the important points.

2. Because he / she does not like Apple's positions regarding iPhone and NBC shows etc, it does not make that person an Apple hater!!!!
Meh. Logic. Give me logic. I've laid out my case as to why NBC has a poor position. Simply insisting that others are "Apple lovers" simply for pointing out NBC's lack of common sense (in logical detail and anecdotes) is what a troll does. Trolls usually use lots of exclamation points too, while making blind statements with nothing to support them. ie. "You MUST believe me!!!!!!!!" Sound familiar?

The problem with the iPhone is that the customer pays FULL price and still gets told what network they will use. In fact, you pay for the phone without signing an AT&T contract. Both points are unlike all other phones. There is no evidence that Apple is subsidising the phone.. as I've repeatedly said, that $200 per customer from subscriber fees that goes towards apple could be pure profit, no one outside Apple knows either way.
You're told when you buy the iPhone that it is ONLY for use with AT&T. When you connect the iPhone to iTunes and it comes up asking you to choose your AT&T plan, you are free to take it back and get a refund. When you state things that are categorically UNTRUE, you undermine anyone's estimation of your ability to reason. You're trying to peer inside Apple's pocket and count the money in its wallet. Stop it. That's called jealousy. Just look at the iPhone. Try it out. Read Apple's website. If you want it, buy it. If anything about it doesn't suit your needs, don't buy it. Making Apple the villain for running a great business seems very immature.

You state that: "Both points are unlike all other phones." Point #1. "You pay FULL PRICE and then get told what network to use." Point #2. "You have to pay for the phone without signing a contract." First, who cares what you percieve as "full price"? Helio charges $295 for a comparable piece of HARDWARE (with much less memory) and requires a 2 year agreement. The device ONLY works i the Helio network, and you will NEVER be able to switch to anything other than Helio's service. Secondly, you comment on buying the phone BEFORE you sign a contract. Why does this matter. Listen closely... Return... The... Phone. Why is that so hard? Moreover, you can cancel AT&T within the grace period, and not get charged. Your left with a perfectly working iPod with no phone services.

Here's my most salient point. Why would a logical *thinking* human being willfully purchase a product that clearly states a number of requirements they do not wish to abide by, and then complain about it as if they didn't know? In Buddhism, its often said that the suffering of the world is caused by not accepting reality for what it is. There was a wonderful movie I pesonally liked called "What dreams may come" that had a very moving view of what happens to those that commit suicide in the afterlife. A personally hell caused by the inability to accept ones own actions. I only feel sad for people like that. It would be one thing if Apple tricked you. They did not. Stop whining.

Getting on topic:
When it comes to NBC - its probably six of 1, and half a dozen of the other: Apple unwilling to budge their position, and up'ed the stakes by stopping selling of NBC shows. NBC wanting to up the price.
Again, I don't think Apple has "upped" any stakes. I think if they allowed a content provider on its way out, to sell "seasons" of shows that won't be available, it creates an ENORMOUS amount of extra work for Apple and creates a significant amount of consumer confusion. Currently, when shows are late, people complain. Sometimes there are delays between the start of a season, and when shows begin appearing regularly in iTunes. People are able to purchase "season passes" and thereby get a discount on the entire run. --Let's take an example. A few months ago, when the movie "Rattatouille" was out, the album was released. But it was only a "partial" album. Were the FULL album available, it would be $9.99, but instead only 10-11 tracks were available. If I'd purchased a 10 tracks, and later wanted the complete album (including album only tracks), I'd be paying MORE than $9.99. Similarly, if someone wants a season pass for a tv show, like Battlestar Galactica, and Apple knows they're not going to be selling the season, they wouldn't sell it. Customers would be highly confused and angry, not knowing whether to buy each episode just to be deprived of a season pass pricing later. Also, for those buying one offs, suddenly in early December, across the spectrum, people will start wondering why the episodes stopped and posting complaints, well AFTER the point where there opinion likely won't matter. Even if seasons on iTunes start later than usual, its better customers voice their opinions NOW, then waiting for December well after discussions have ended. It's just COMMON SENSE for Apple. To my knowledge, Apple won't be pulling existing/past seasons until December. It's the NEW seasons that they won't carry for the perfectly understandable reasons I mentioned.

As I said before, its a negotiating game.
NBC and Apple will talk and a comprise will be worked out.
Is it really? In my opinion, NBC simply feels the need to make more money and they think they don't need iTunes. NBC seems like they have a full plan on where they see themselves going (Hulu), and that iTunes doesn't need to be a part of that plan. Google and find the CNN Money article and check it out. These vague comments about iPods containing mostly stolen content, and that Apple needs to do more about piracy are RIDICULOUS. Also, I'm sure Apple has nothing against "bundling" so long as the bundling isn't about raising prices, simply to re-present past values as "bargains". All of these words by NBC ring very hollow.

I think consumers need to speak out NOW if they want NBC to reconsider. It's already been circulated that the networks do NOT believe that their is a future in downloadable content/video (and that iTunes is not long for this world). They do not want people "downloading" but "streaming" content they can choose to give access to on their own schedules, and as a "service" representing a continual source of revenue. As consumers we really need to discourage moves toward this trend, so that we are not all labelled "thieves" simply for repurposing content we've been given access to, for our personal use and convenience.

~ CB
 
Please, you make the 'content companies' sound like little raggamuffin, orphaned children who spend their days singing 'it's a hard knock life for us'.

The truth is quite the opposite, where consumers have overpayed for underdeveloped products such as cd's, dvd's and other forms of media for years. Apple's hard line of consumer friendly standardization of product benefits the masses substantially more than did the economic golden age of entertainment media during the late 80's and 90's. However, the change is not so significant that we should begin to feel even an inkling of sympathy for companies such as NBC-Universal who appear to be retracting their product out of bitterness and discontentment, much like a spoiled, dejected child who whimpers all the way home with HIS ball and HIS bat.

ITS is going nowhere, simply because prices are fair and products are delivered fast and met with great satisfaction. NBC will be hard pressed to find another medium by which they can reach as many consumers AND do so with as great success as Apple's ITS has.
LOL! This is all true. I'm getting Lil' Orphan Annie flashbacks. That's hilarious. Yes, the current state of the music industry was started the moment Napster was released and people realized a better distribution medium. If the music industry had preempted Napster with an "iTunes", I think Peer-to-peer file sharing would not have taken off like it has. Poor distribution methods cause piracy. It's the same in the U.S. as it is internationally.

Here's an article entitled "Why do people pirate media outside the USA?"
http://eliax.com/blog/articles/2006_05_28_why_do_people_pirate_media_outside_the_USA.htm

It's a very good snapshot. In Jurassic Park, there was a point made that "Life will find a way." that you can't solely count on "restrictions" as a means of prevented the behavior of living things. A much more useful tool is "convenience". Just like lightning will find the quickest route to the ground, people will find the most convenient means of acquiring content. If its easier to BUY then people will BUY, if purchasing content in the middle of the night or for playback on your portable device isn't available or is WAY to expensive, people will find a way to steal it. Any attempt to state this otherwise is utter foolishness and a sure path to failure.

~ CB
 
guys, this is all about Apple's arrogant way of doing business. Telling other companies the ONLY way they will sell Music or Video content.

I don't think so!

From a 7:20 pm Press release from NBC:

In a statement to the press, NBC flatly dismissed Apple's contention that the TV studio's ultimate goal had been to charge $4.99 per show, more than twice as much as today's $1.99 rate. The actual goal has been to institute "flexibility in wholesale pricing" and bundle shows together in more "attractive" ways, said NBC's executive vice president of communications, Cory Shields.

Bundleing is one of the things it's all about! Ya know they want to make us buy a pkg instead of Ala Carte programming! Meaning one would have to buy several programs just to get the one ya want just like cable tier programming!

NBC argued that its would-be partner was the unreasonable firm in the dispute, attempting to keep prices at its media store fixed in a way that favors sales of iPods and iPhones above the shows themselves.

"It is clear that Apple’s retail pricing strategy for its iTunes service is designed to drive sales of Apple devices," Shields asserted," at the expense of those who create the content that make these devices worth buying."

And Finally:

"We want consumers to know that all our returning series, including new episodes, will be available on iTunes through the remainder of the contract, which expires in early December," said Shields. "Our content is also available on NBC.com, Amazon.com, and the soon-to-launch hulu.com."

It sure seems like they wanted their price high on iTunes in order to drive consumers to in their words:

"the soon-to-launch hulu.com."

It is obvious what this is all about.
 
NBC presumes that a "significant" amount of material on my iPod has been illegally downloaded.


Not only does that presumption insult me, it insults all iPod owners who have used the iTunes services or who have purchased audio CDs and encoded them onto their iPods.


What about Zune owners? Are all 500 Zune owners presumed to be carrying around illegally downloaded content on their units?



It defies all logic and rebukes plain old common sense; iTunes offers a medium that customers willingly pay for despite the fact that this same exact content is broadcasted for free to the general public.


I sincerely and truly hope that NBC loses a "significant" amount of money in parallel to the level of insult that they have lobbed at iPod and iTunes users.






I'd like to also point out that this issue really isn't about pricing; this fallout is really about control. And more specifically, it is about NBC losing control of the distribution of their material. It irks them, it irritates them and it leads them to incorrectly believe that they can regain the control of the distribution of their work back from Apple.

But the crutch and fallacy of their plans is the device itself - the iPod - and the tight integration with iTunes that conveniently offers iPod owners a simple and an elegant user experience.

NBC mistakenly assumes that streamed content from their own servers (presumingly, with some sort of advertising-based support facility) will compel users to forgo the iTunes and iPod experience, but this is just a silly exercise in stupidity. They negate the prime motivating appeal of the iPod - its portability. The iPods are sync'd through iTunes and the user carries and watches/listens to the content while away from their computers.


Ironically, with the speculation that a WiFi enabled iPod will be released soon, NBC's insistence on supplying their own streamed content would wrest them from the confines of the iTunes and iPod experience.

But even this does not make any sense. Why eliminate a revenue stream from the iTunes agreement and transition to an advertising-supported, streamed content approach when both distribution methods are viable business models?



NBC, if you're reading this, here's my sentiment, "Good riddance!" I watch very little television and the deplorable, greedy actions by your management compels me one less choice to ponder when it comes to making a decision concerning what to watch.

-joedy
 
...

But even this does not make any sense. Why eliminate a revenue stream from the iTunes agreement and transition to an advertising-supported, streamed content approach when both distribution methods are viable business models?



...

-joedy

umm. because they're really stupid and really venal?
 
"We want consumers to know that all our returning series, including new episodes, will be available on iTunes through the remainder of the contract, which expires in early December," said Shields. "Our content is also available on NBC.com, Amazon.com, and the soon-to-launch hulu.com."

It sure seems like they wanted their price high on iTunes in order to drive consumers to in their words:

"the soon-to-launch hulu.com."

It is obvious what this is all about.

I totally agree.

Just went to http://www.hulu.com/ and not much was really there . . . just a bunch of images from some shows I guess that they are going to broadcast. Pretty lame in many regards. Just by looking at the initial copy, you can't tell what this thing is going to be. Are they going to broadcast these shows? Are they going to sell them? Do you rent from them? What????

And this is supposed to "compete" with iTunes? Please! These guys don't know good business, good marketing, good design, good talent if it bit them in the ass! (I'm sure these guys are the same guys that wished they were the ones that signed Milli Vanilli back in the day).

If you read their copy, it says . . . "Why Hulu? Objectively, Hulu is short, easy to spell, easy to pronounce, and rhymes with itself . . ."

Wha???

Rhymes with itself??? Rhymes with itself? Hell, EVERYTHING rhymes with itself! Crap, rhymes with . . . . Crap! Stupid rhymes with . . . you got it . . . stupid.

Who writes this stuff?

Probably the same people that think they are going to make millions off of HULU (how bad could it be, it rhymes with itself).

And you know what? I signed up to be one of their beta testers. I got see how this thing is going to be. Obviously, I doubt it is going to go far, but I still gotta check it out. I guess it's like looking at a car wreck. You know you're not supposed to look . . . but you just can't help it.
 
I are not going to argue....

NBC are (I detest singular plurals) going to come off looking like the greedy dolts they are.
Well, if you live in the states, it is standard English to say "NBC is..." just as it's the opposite in GB. And if you're a Brit, bully for you, but I detest kidney pie. So there.

And as they say on MacBreak Weekly when they've gone utterly off topic, "Rathole....."
 
NBC are (I detest singular plurals) going to come off looking like the greedy dolts they are.

Ok, completely off topic, but NBC is not a "singular plural." It's a collective noun, much like "army" or "staff." Collective nouns follow the third person singular conjugation.

All that said, NBC is going to regret its decision.
 
This is not going to lead to a watershed event where everyone abandons Apple and it is left with no video or audio content on iTunes---so NBC are (I detest singular plurals) going to come off looking like the greedy dolts they are.

Two points on this.

First point: Yes, you're correct: people are hardly going to leave iTMS over this situation. I think Apple knows this and is planning to beat the living hell out of NBC with this particular fact, should the need arise. And bully for Apple, frankly.

Second point: As much as we in the U.S. would like to pretend otherwise, the entire world is not America. Similarly, the entire world is not Australia or New Zealand. It is also not the U.K., from which both your native accent and your variation of the English language originate.
  1. Is is correct in the usage for the prior poster whom you tried to correct, assuming his or her origin is the U.S. It would only be incorrect if their origin was the same as yours.
  2. On a similar note, each year's worth of broadcasting of a given show is a SEASON, but the English insist on calling it a "SERIES". Now maybe that's what it's called in Jolly Olde England, but it isn't called that anywhere else (clearly not here in America, at least) but yet those of us who are fans of Doctor Who and Battlestar Galactica don't go out of our way to "correct" the Brits when they refer to shows in this way.
So there! :p
 
Ok, completely off topic, but NBC is not a "singular plural." It's a collective noun, much like "army" or "staff." Collective nouns follow the third person singular conjugation.

All that said, NBC is going to regret its decision.

Technically, that's incorrect under the Queen's English rules. It happens to be correct for American English, though, which makes it correct to my ears as well. However, as Security Chief Garibaldi once said, "It's an imperfect universe."
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.