I signed up for Netflix for the local content.
-Not a single European customer ever..
-Not a single European customer ever..
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple TV+ Could Face Ban in Europe Unless It Meets Proposed Requirement of 30% European Content
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Or European studios could produce something people will pay to watch. Then, they wouldn't need handouts from the government.
What a stupid arbitrary rule, that'd be like the US saying all streaming services around the world have to have at least 30% US content to stream in the US (OK they do but...) Just sounds like an unfair rule designed to profit European production companies, This wasn't created from fairness this was created from envy.
So license some French films and a few BBC dramas, those are the only things coming out of Europe worth watching anyway.
This reminds of when I was living in Canada. I was surprised when I first signed up for cable there, you could choose a custom package with 10 or 20 channels BUT at least half the channels you chose had to be Canadian channels (even though they were a small percentage of the total selection, mostly US channels and several from other countries).
I wanted the UK to stay in the EU but proposals like this make understand why people wanted to leave. It is petty and unwarranted interference and the worst possible result (banning the services) would clearly have no benefit whatsoever to EU consumers.
Good content is now available, (often dubbed into various languages) from all over the world. To force European content that few people would watch seems to me to be completely pointless.
The UK does, without a doubt, produce some very good programmes and films. Often, until recently, these films would be partly funded by the EU but a lot of them are not going to attract huge audiences. They often tend to be films concerning social or political issues rather than being Hollywood style action and adventure and where women wake up every morning with perfect hair and still wearing their makeup and the men wake up having apparently had a shave while asleep! I like the social issue type films, and the European film makers are good at them as well, but I can't see them getting a massive audience. This is something the EU should leave to the market and not indulge in nanny state interference.
Good content is now available, (often dubbed into various languages) from all over the world. To force European content that few people would watch seems to me to be completely pointless.
The UK does, without a doubt, produce some very good programmes and films. Often, until recently, these films would be partly funded by the EU but a lot of them are not going to attract huge audiences. They often tend to be films concerning social or political issues rather than being Hollywood style action and adventure and where women wake up every morning with perfect hair and still wearing their makeup and the men wake up having apparently had a shave while asleep! I like the social issue type films, and the European film makers are good at them as well, but I can't see them getting a massive audience. This is something the EU should leave to the market and not indulge in nanny state interference.
Indeed, no surprise the UK wants to leave and can't get a deal. The EU is interfering in areas that don't require interference. The original concept of the EC was solid and facilitate trade, but what has morphed into the EU is crossing the line. And the funny thing is, we actually pay them to come up with this kind of nonsense.
there's a difference to EU politician's needs and EU consumer's needs
Last edited:
Maybe Sweden can see it as an opportunity to sell "Nöjesmassakern" to a broader European audience?
How about Crown dependencies like the the Bailiwick of Jersey?
I am thinking about Bergerac with John Nettles.
AppleTV+ barely has content as it is. I don’t want MY AppleTV+stuffed with crap EU shows they can get anywhere in the EU.
Tehran was brilliant but those “Israelis” don’t count.
Tehran was brilliant but those “Israelis” don’t count.
Easy: just churn out a load of reality TV.
Plus one or two arty productions to let the great and good keep feeling superior at their sophisticated dinner parties and off those damn colonial owned streaming companies’ backs.
Plus one or two arty productions to let the great and good keep feeling superior at their sophisticated dinner parties and off those damn colonial owned streaming companies’ backs.
Last edited:
That’s not the EU way. You ban, whine and cry to make someone else do it for you.
I guess they could produce local content once, keep it forever and trim old foreign content when there is new (foreign aka American) content.
For example, Apple has 10 movies, 3 European and 7 American. When a new American movie premieres, it replaces an older American movie in Europe only so Apple could always keep that percentage. Would suck for the consumer that’s for sure.
I am confused by the EU. I keep hearing that it is a single market of 445 million or so people, yet you now argue that U.S. content producers have lower production costs because they can deliver it to a country of 330 million? Seems odd. You say production cost is not the same as localization cost, to which I respond that production cost has nothing to do with market size. Nothing stops European companies from producing films that are designed to target broad audiences.
What is funny is that you get the reality of film financing completely for a large number of Hollywood projects. The films are financed by pre-selling the international rights, leaving all the risk to the U.S. market. An approach available in reverse to European productions.
Again, I am confused. I understand that there are 280 million French speakers in the world, so that still seems like a pretty big market. Americans prefer dubbed films, as to many other territories. You say localization is inexpensive, why would a French film dubbed in English not appeal to American audiences? In France, over 77% of people 35 or older watch foreign language content dubbed into French. Probably a bit lower than the number for the U.S., but not enough to matter. The real problem is not the language, it is the content. Very few French films are of interest to international audiences. Same goes true for most non-British films out of Europe.
Netflix has content it owns and content it licenses. Apple so far has chosen to either own all its content or license it on a worldwide basis, particularly to avoid the licensing rights mess that Netflix has. You say license fees are not an issue because it is not your money. It costs more (often a lot more) to maintain world wide rights.
You are not ”forced” to pay for any of it. You choose to do so. If you do not think that the content you want to watch is worth the price, you can certainly purchase some of it directly (packaged media or online delivery). Some of it cannot be purchased that way. However, nothing forces you to pay for any of it.
That is the difference. This is simply a tax, but one that the bureaucrats do not want to admit they are charging, as their citizens would hate it. If they want to add a 30% tax on the cost of Amazon, Apple, Disney and Netflix’s services, let them be upfront about it, so that their citizens know what they are paying.
No, I said they should license the cheapest content without regard to its age or interest, so that they hit their “local content requirement”. They can get tens of thousands of hours of local variety shows and high school sports so that they can meet that requirement that 30% of their available content is locally produced. No one any where might watch it, but until they require that 30% of what people watch is of European, it will not matter.
Or they could not produce any local content and just license the cheapest crap they can find to pad the catalog.
Better: Apple has 10 movies they make. They find a 6 episodes of a Walloon language show from the 1950s and poof they have hit their requirement. They want to add another 10 movies? They find 6 more episodes of Romansh TV. They can also add Slovenian, Croatian, and other tiny inexpensive niche content.
Nah not most....and the word is YOUR.
Just because I didn't mention it doesn't mean I don't have a problem about it.
Then the complaint in the article is even more full of crap. Your post is telling the EU that the U.S already pumps money into their country. Thanks for confirming my point. 😂
Because this has nothing to do with quality, this is simply a tax on successful American companies that they hope will just give in to them. They just want these companies to subsidize their production and eat the cost.
Given that Apple has world wide rights to all their content, they could choose not to care about people accessing it via VPN and then offer the product for less money in the UK and the US, but charge more in Europe and make it very clear why.
There are many reasons for the EU to do this.
This is simply a retaliation against the US for not paying a single dime in taxes for services provided in the EU. Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft et al. are paying way too little vat and profit taxes.
Or the other way around: if you are born on an American plane, never had anything to do with the US, you WILL pay income taxes in the US. The US is forcing banks around the world to refuse services to those people.
Or this one: the investments in US movie/series production are so big that there is no chance for small innovative companies to grow. The big bullies are buying up every single potentially successful business and are throttling innovation. Look at what Facebook is facing with lawsuits in the US at the moment.
This is simply a retaliation against the US for not paying a single dime in taxes for services provided in the EU. Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft et al. are paying way too little vat and profit taxes.
Or the other way around: if you are born on an American plane, never had anything to do with the US, you WILL pay income taxes in the US. The US is forcing banks around the world to refuse services to those people.
Or this one: the investments in US movie/series production are so big that there is no chance for small innovative companies to grow. The big bullies are buying up every single potentially successful business and are throttling innovation. Look at what Facebook is facing with lawsuits in the US at the moment.
The EU does not equal Europe. If you shout then at least get your facts straight
Last edited:
The UK is not their [EU] country. Get your facts straight
I don't really get this requirement.... Can someone ELI5?
So people in the EU pay for a subscription service for content.
EU's Logic says we will STOP our people from paying for things they want unless you make more shows in Europe?
This world is ******* crazy.
-How about if people don't like the content, they won't pay for the subscription?
-How about if the EU want EU based shows, the EU gives tax cuts to production companies so a European based steaming network is born to compete with Netflix.
I interpret this as a child moaning that they want what I have and they don't want to do get it themselves they just want to take mine.
The EU are a bunch of kids.
So people in the EU pay for a subscription service for content.
EU's Logic says we will STOP our people from paying for things they want unless you make more shows in Europe?
This world is ******* crazy.
-How about if people don't like the content, they won't pay for the subscription?
-How about if the EU want EU based shows, the EU gives tax cuts to production companies so a European based steaming network is born to compete with Netflix.
I interpret this as a child moaning that they want what I have and they don't want to do get it themselves they just want to take mine.
The EU are a bunch of kids.
The US doesn’t pay taxes elsewhere so no retaliation required for that. Taxes are paid by people and legal entities. Those legal entities are subjected to rules and they operate by the rules. If the EU doesn’t like the double taxation rules it wants it members to adhere to, then it should change those guidance and rules. You can’t blame a legal entity for following the rules and choose to domicile in the most benecial location.
and no services aren’t refused to US citizens that is nonsense. Rules are simply applied when are one but reside elsewhere. Just like other rules are applied to other people.