as a consumer (and fan of old television) that was a pretty great time
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+ Curbs Costs After Expensive Projects Fail to Capture Viewers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
as a consumer (and fan of old television) that was a pretty great time
that works if they happen to have a lot of stuff that you like
in my case Apple TV has like 3 to 5 shows that anyone in our household is interested in
quite frankly, if the new silo and severance seasons come out around the same time I'll probably re-subscribe for a month
if they come out at different times I will almost certainly just find another way to watch them
Last edited:
I’ve had an AppleTV+ subscription going for a couple of months now. Honestly the quality of the content is so much better than the hit and miss of Netflix. Just finished Presumed Innocent, what a series!
I get Netflix has a magnitudes bigger library but I so often find myself watching one or two episodes of a show before finding it’s just garbage. I’ve yet to have that experience in the 4 series I’ve now watched back to back on AppleTV+
I get Netflix has a magnitudes bigger library but I so often find myself watching one or two episodes of a show before finding it’s just garbage. I’ve yet to have that experience in the 4 series I’ve now watched back to back on AppleTV+
By your post and reference to 9.99, I assumed you were referring to U.S. prices. Pricing is different in Germany.
Assuming the prices you quoted include VAT, it appears that pre-VAT/sales tax streaming prices in Germany are a fair amount lower than they are in the U.S., especially Disney+.
Given Apple's very large overall customer base, its TV+ streaming service hasn't managed to attract that many subscribers. Considering how much Apple has spent on content, I don’t think it's just "guessing” that Apple has lost a lot of money on TV+ and things aren't going well.
Does any of following taken from the article sound like things are going well?
"Apple tries to rein in Hollywood spending after years of losses." (article title)
"After spending more than $20 billion to produce original TV shows and movies that not a lot of people watch, Apple is starting to refine its strategy in Hollywood."
"But its streaming service is attracting just 0.2% of TV viewing in the US. Apple TV+ generates less viewing in one month than Netflix does in one day."
"Subscriber growth has been weak, with the platform’s original content a fraction of what rivals offer"
They have some good shows and movies, but I did not feel the price increase fit the amount of contend released. Also I am back to cutting all my subscriptions and just buying the stuff I am interested in. Is more expensive but saves me a lot of money.
Question. Have you read the source article? It’s probably worth it, instead of quoting a clickbait title. It paints a very different picture. It’s a very Netflix focussed article and makes comparison with Apple noting that no one actually knows what or why things are happening. Some of the quotes in that article are also very telling and fly directly against the article in Macrumors. Balanced reporting is important, as are sources. Try reading the actual article and you may have a different view on this story. Here are some useful quotes missed out on the article O.P.
Yet as studios and streaming services across Hollywood cut back after years of record spending and record losses, Apple is also looking to make its streaming business more sustainable.
Some Apple employees push back on the Nielsen figures, arguing they are inaccurate and incomplete. Nielsen only measures US viewing on certain devices. And if you exclude Netflix, Apple’s share of top shows isn’t that far behind most of its peers.
But there is no question that Apple has learned from several years of investment and is now trying to bring more discipline and strategy to its Hollywood operation.
Disney, Warner and Paramount have all fired staffers, according to the article and they also say that Apple hasn’t, but do need to reign in costs, as have Amazon and Netflix.
I said from the outset that I believe this is about efficiencies and everything in the actual Bloomberg article points to that. The only doom and gloom on Apple TV is because people are not reading the source material and they put their own spin/bias on it. People need to sit back, take a breath and look at the facts.
Of course I read the source article as that is precisely where my quotes came from. I don't see how you can conclude it "doesn't even suggest things are not going well" (your previous comment) based on the quotes I took from the article. The article certainly does suggest things are not going well even with the push back comments from "some" Apple employees.
I say that because your first quote was the title of the Macrumors story. It's a headline to bring people into the story Moving on, we can agree to disagree. I think they are doing what every other Content Producer/Streamer is doing and trying to be efficient, as specifically quoted in the article. You may not agree.
Yet as studios and streaming services across Hollywood cut back after years of record spending and record losses, Apple is also looking to make its streaming business more sustainable.
Last edited:
So, you based you reply on just the first quote in my post? Seriously?
Anyway... as I said, given Apple's very large overall customer base, its TV+ streaming service hasn't managed to attract that many subscribers. Considering how much Apple has spent on content, I don't think it's just "guessing" that Apple has lost a lot of money on TV+ and things aren't going well.
Nope, you’re just guessing. Nothing in the article says that is the case that they have lost a lot of money and they even state, as it was quoted, they are tracking as good as any of the others. But as I mentioned, People are free to imagine any narrative if it makes them happy. I'm just going rely on facts. You do you.
Last edited:
I took several quotes from the article yet you had chosen to focus on just the first "title" quote and apparently ignored the others, even asking if I had actually read the article when my various quotes HAD COME FROM the article.
You clearly fail to recognize/comprehend the issues Apple is having with TV+ and how much money they've lost The fact that you had suggested Apple's $85 billion "Services" revenue helped show how well Apple was doing with streaming demonstrated how little you understood about what the $85 billion actually represented, and the true financial state of Apple’s streaming services business.
This site estimates Apple spent 4.5B on original content in 2023, about same as Amazon. Netflix spent 7+B
www.statista.com
(I believe this doesn't cover licensed content. Netflix licenses a lot of stuff. Apple does some. Of course Netflix's subscriber base dwarfs Apple's.)
It's estimated AppleTV has 25M paying subs and 50M viewers on some kind of free or discounted promotion. Let's be generous and say they have 50M customers paying the current full price of $10. That's .5B. So in 2023, they lost 4B on original content alone.
That doesn't include all their other operating costs, like streaming cost, marketing, and an entire TV/movie division. Also other costs like building their own studio to do in house production
So yes they are losing billions and billions. Maybe not a big deal for a 3T company. But at some point, they will have to justify it to the shareholders
Top original content spenders 2029| Statista
The Walt Disney Company is expected to spend the highest amount on original content in 2029 among streaming companies, with an estimated ***** billion U.S.
www.statista.com
(I believe this doesn't cover licensed content. Netflix licenses a lot of stuff. Apple does some. Of course Netflix's subscriber base dwarfs Apple's.)
It's estimated AppleTV has 25M paying subs and 50M viewers on some kind of free or discounted promotion. Let's be generous and say they have 50M customers paying the current full price of $10. That's .5B. So in 2023, they lost 4B on original content alone.
That doesn't include all their other operating costs, like streaming cost, marketing, and an entire TV/movie division. Also other costs like building their own studio to do in house production
So yes they are losing billions and billions. Maybe not a big deal for a 3T company. But at some point, they will have to justify it to the shareholders
Whatever they need to do is fine, as long as you don’t screw with Foundation and get that show out on a much more regular basis.
Yeah, that would be a new series since none of the characters would be in it I as far as I know
Can't speak for everywhere, but here in NYC they do market their shows a lot. It's on billboards, public transportation, and etc. The problem is, they market almost equivalent to Netflix. But everyone knows the Red Netflix logo, while most have no idea what Apple TV+ is. Apple needs to market their service more.
That series was shortened and cancelled. There is a lot more material from the books for multiple other seasons.
Unsurprisingly, apple's strategy of making high brow, intelligent programming designed to win awards, doesn't translate well to popularity amongst the average person who wants to watch stuff that they find entertaining.
Same reason movies that often win oscars for best picture rarely are box office hits.
Same reason movies that often win oscars for best picture rarely are box office hits.
With other characters since it plays further in the future. So it would be a new series if none of the characters are in it
Plus, with the popularity of the characters to non-book fans, they could’ve created additional stories to fill the void between the end of the original run and the new books set further in the future.
(If I am not mistaken, there is already a comic book company working on such a series)
(If I am not mistaken, there is already a comic book company working on such a series)