Apple TV Streaming Service Receives Price Increase

[turbineseaplane]

Might be partly due to the prominent display of Apple products (iPhones, Apple Watches, Macbooks, etc.) in series where such devices are used. I wouldn't have been entirely surprised if some Foundation characters had worn Apple Watches.

Has the Vision Pro made any appearances in any of the shows?

 

[whitby]

I am not sure Apple get how these subscription services work. Up the price and people will simply enroll to watch a series and then abandon.

On top of that the gap between seasons on Apple TV is horrendous. Just look at Severance, Pluribus, Silo and now Dark Matter. For All Mankind etc. By the time a new season arrives we have lost the plot and completely forgotten everything.

It is not worth the money and the choices are very limited. At the moment Silo and Dark Matter are the only ones we watch and paying the new fee for 8 episodes a month (one a week for each title for a month) for a limited time (8 to 10 episodes if you are lucky) makes little to no sense. I feel Apple may be on the way out. I have a limit of $35 a month I am willing to pay for streaming services and it looks like Apple is the next to be axed. Sigh.

As they say, 'So long and thanks for all the fish' . 😂

 

[JoeG4]

wow $15. That's like.. twice what I pay for Crunchyroll lol.

PBS passport is $5/mo. Hulu if you have the right credit card is like $5 a month.

Why on earth would I pay apple $15 a mo for... -checks notes- severance and Ted Lasso? What the heck is a Ted Lasso anyway? Dude looks like a creep.

 

[ralph_sws]

You had to have known that $5 a month was never going to be sustainable for a video streaming service.

That's the problem with trying to subsidise your offerings upfront, IMO. You condition customers to expect quality service at a fraction of the actual price, and then the problem comes when it's time to finally raise price in a bid to cover costs and make a profit.

Ah yes, the classic “customers should be grateful they were undercharged before” argument. Cheap introductory pricing is a business strategy, not charity — and customers are allowed to complain when the price later gets ridiculous.

 

[ralph_sws]

Apple TV+ launched with around 9 shows/movies and no live sports at that $4.99/month price. It now has around 315 shows/movies plus live sports. Today's TV+ has around 3,400% more titles than that $4.99/month service did, plus live sports. You really can't directly compare the two. I also think Apple, and other streaming services, used penetration pricing to try to attract/hook customers. Apple is still losing money on TV+.

Whether or not today's TV+ with all of the extra content is worth $14.99/month or $119/year is a matter of personal preference. TV+ clearly has a smaller catalog than other major streaming services.

That “3,400% more titles” figure sounds impressive until you remember Apple TV+ started with an absurdly tiny catalog. Going from almost nothing to a few hundred titles doesn’t suddenly make $14.99 a bargain. The relevant comparison is what $15 buys you today versus Netflix, Disney+, Max, etc. — not what Apple offered for $4.99 seven years ago.

 

[ralph_sws]

I am not sure Apple get how these subscription services work. Up the price and people will simply enroll to watch a series and then abandon.

On top of that the gap between seasons on Apple TV is horrendous. Just look at Severance, Pluribus, Silo and now Dark Matter. For All Mankind etc. By the time a new season arrives we have lost the plot and completely forgotten everything.

It is not worth the money and the choices are very limited. At the moment Silo and Dark Matter are the only ones we watch and paying the new fee for 8 episodes a month (one a week for each title for a month) for a limited time (8 to 10 episodes if you are lucky) makes little to no sense. I feel Apple may be on the way out. I have a limit of $35 a month I am willing to pay for streaming services and it looks like Apple is the next to be axed. Sigh.

As they say, 'So long and thanks for all the fish' . 😂

Yeees! This is the part Apple seems to be missing. With such a small catalog and huge gaps between seasons, raising the monthly price just encourages people to cancel, wait until a few shows have accumulated, subscribe for one month, binge everything and leave again.
At 14.99, Apple TV is no longer cheap enough to simply keep running in the background “just in case.” They are practically teaching customers how to churn.

 

[johnsawyercjs]

Has the Vision Pro made any appearances in any of the shows?

Not that I've seen, but I don't watch all the Apple-produced shows, so one might have been slipped in. I doubt it though, since the usual product placement is naturally to try to drum up customers for products, and apparently Apple has sold all the Vision Pros it's going to make.

Not to say that Apple might not want to drum up some notoriety for producing something people can no longer buy except used.

 

[ralph_sws]

For clarity, “title” here means one individual movie or one TV series. A series counts as one title regardless of how many seasons or episodes it has. Live sports are not included in these catalog totals. The figures are approximate because streaming libraries change constantly.

* Apple TV — $14.99/month — ~350 titles
Around 120 movies + 220 TV series
* Paramount+ Premium — $13.99/month — ~1,650 titles
Around 980 movies + 670 TV series
* Disney+ Premium — $18.99/month — ~2,080 titles
Around 1,400 movies + 680 TV series
* Peacock Premium Plus — $19.99/month — ~1,900 titles
Around 870 movies + 1,030 TV series
* Hulu No Ads — $18.99/month — ~3,100 titles
Around 1,230 movies + 1,870 TV series
* HBO Max Standard — $18.49/month — ~3,600 titles
Around 1,870 movies + 1,740 TV series
* Netflix Standard — $19.99/month — ~8,000 titles
Around 4,570 movies + 3,430 TV series
* Prime Video — $8.99/month — ~28,000 titles
Around 22,800 movies + 5,100 TV series

 

[Fedsbackhand]

To be fair the long gaps between seasons is not exclusive to Apple. It does however have a much larger impact on a streamer with a small selection of shows.

Apple may have 220 shows but I'm only watching a handful.

HBO has a much deeper catalogue, so it doesn't really matter. There is always something to watch.

 

[Abazigal]

Ah yes, the classic “customers should be grateful they were undercharged before” argument. Cheap introductory pricing is a business strategy, not charity — and customers are allowed to complain when the price later gets ridiculous.

When Uber came to Singapore in 2016, I was familiar with its business model and knew that its offerings were not financially sustainable. This didn’t stop me from taking advantage of its subsidised fares while they were available. At the same time, the stiff competition with Grab also resulted in Grab being very aggressive with promotions and pricing.

I knew that all this would come to an end some day, and it did in 2018 when Uber exited our market. True enough, Grab followed up with higher prices and worsening terms for drivers, and it still remained hugely unprofitable for the longest time; and it doesn’t take a genius to predict where this would lead.

So for two years, I benefitted from cheaper, more accessible rides, but I never treated that as the “default”. I don’t relish the price hikes, but I accepted them. Nowadays, I take Grab very sparingly. It’s an option when I am tired or in a hurry and don’t mind spending a little more.

Content creation is not cheap. Running a video streaming platform is not cheap. I suspect that the bulk of TV+ viewer base is in the US, which limits its growth, and so you have higher prices to make up for this.

By virtue of being on Macrumours, I would like to assume that we are all more tech-savvy, more up to date with the happenings of the tech industry, more cognisant with the implications whenever a company enters a market with a dirt cheap offering in a bid to garner market share, and how that tends to warp expectations. You are certainly free to complain, but I am pretty sure that on some level, you had to have known that this was inevitable?!?

 

[ralph_sws]

When Uber came to Singapore in 2016, I was familiar with its business model and knew that its offerings were not financially sustainable. This didn’t stop me from taking advantage of its subsidised fares while they were available. At the same time, the stiff competition with Grab also resulted in Grab being very aggressive with promotions and pricing.

I knew that all this would come to an end some day, and it did in 2018 when Uber exited our market. True enough, Grab followed up with higher prices and worsening terms for drivers, and it still remained hugely unprofitable for the longest time; and it doesn’t take a genius to predict where this would lead.

So for two years, I benefitted from cheaper, more accessible rides, but I never treated that as the “default”. I don’t relish the price hikes, but I accepted them. Nowadays, I take Grab very sparingly. It’s an option when I am tired or in a hurry and don’t mind spending a little more.

Content creation is not cheap. Running a video streaming platform is not cheap. I suspect that the bulk of TV+ viewer base is in the US, which limits its growth, and so you have higher prices to make up for this.

By virtue of being on Macrumours, I would like to assume that we are all more tech-savvy, more up to date with the happenings of the tech industry, more cognisant with the implications whenever a company enters a market with a dirt cheap offering in a bid to garner market share, and how that tends to warp expectations. You are certainly free to complain, but I am pretty sure that on some level, you had to have known that this was inevitable?!?

Ah yes, the classic “you should have known this was coming, therefore you shouldn’t complain” argument.
Nobody expected 4.99 to last forever. The question is whether 14.99 is good value today — and that’s where Apple has a problem.
Apple TV has roughly 350 movies and series combined. For broadly similar monthly prices, Paramount+ has around 5× more, HBO Max around 10× more, and Netflix well over 20× more content.
And your Uber analogy actually proves the opposite of what you think: once the price stopped making sense, you used it less. That is exactly what people are saying they’ll do with Apple TV — subscribe for a month, watch what they want, then cancel.
Being “tech-savvy” doesn’t mean applauding every price increase because you understand the business model. Sometimes it just means looking at the price, looking at the competition, and saying: this is simply poor value.

 

[Und Eser]

When Uber came to Singapore in 2016, I was familiar with its business model and knew that its offerings were not financially sustainable. This didn’t stop me from taking advantage of its subsidised fares while they were available. At the same time, the stiff competition with Grab also resulted in Grab being very aggressive with promotions and pricing.

I knew that all this would come to an end some day, and it did in 2018 when Uber exited our market. True enough, Grab followed up with higher prices and worsening terms for drivers, and it still remained hugely unprofitable for the longest time; and it doesn’t take a genius to predict where this would lead.

So for two years, I benefitted from cheaper, more accessible rides, but I never treated that as the “default”. I don’t relish the price hikes, but I accepted them. Nowadays, I take Grab very sparingly. It’s an option when I am tired or in a hurry and don’t mind spending a little more.

Content creation is not cheap. Running a video streaming platform is not cheap. I suspect that the bulk of TV+ viewer base is in the US, which limits its growth, and so you have higher prices to make up for this.

By virtue of being on Macrumours, I would like to assume that we are all more tech-savvy, more up to date with the happenings of the tech industry, more cognisant with the implications whenever a company enters a market with a dirt cheap offering in a bid to garner market share, and how that tends to warp expectations. You are certainly free to complain, but I am pretty sure that on some level, you had to have known that this was inevitable?!?

Transportation and streaming are two totally disparate logistical entities.

The inevitability of the thin end of a pricing wedge getting thicker with any company owned by shareholders driven solely by returns on their initial investments, OTOH...

Question is, when does the capitalism inevitably start eating itself?

 

[Abazigal]

Transportation and streaming are two totally disparate logistical entities.

The inevitability of the thin end of a pricing wedge getting thicker with any company owned by shareholders driven solely by returns on their initial investments, OTOH...

What’s the alternative? To keep TV+ at $5/month knowing fully well that it will not wind up being profitable?

 

[Und Eser]

What’s the alternative?

Something which better acknowledges the relationship between value and price.

 

[webkit]

That “3,400% more titles” figure sounds impressive until you remember Apple TV+ started with an absurdly tiny catalog. Going from almost nothing to a few hundred titles doesn’t suddenly make $14.99 a bargain. The relevant comparison is what $15 buys you today versus Netflix, Disney+, Max, etc. — not what Apple offered for $4.99 seven years ago.

I never said it was a "bargain." I was simply pointing out that today's TV+ is notably different than the original i.e., the price increases came with more titles and the addition of live sports.

I had also noted that TV+ clearly has a smaller catalog than other major streaming services.

 

[webkit]

Something which better acknowledges the relationship between value and price.

It can come down to personal preference. While some people may not feel it's a good value for the price, others may really enjoy the content and feel that it's worth it. When it comes to things like entertainment, "value" can be pretty subjective.

Having said that, there is no question that TV+ has a smaller catalog than other major streaming services.

 

[AL2TEACH]

article also pointed out that wages grew faster than inflation, even if only slightly.

Maybe the average wage employee would question that one 🙂 aahhh stats. Do enjoy Steve B. vids on YouTube.

 

[CarAnalogy]

Might be partly due to the prominent display of Apple products (iPhones, Apple Watches, Macbooks, etc.) in series where such devices are used. I wouldn't have been entirely surprised if some Foundation characters had worn Apple Watches.

That’s definitely part of it. Every series feels like it had to go through the same set of executives who have lots of agendas aside from making a great piece of art.

 

[OGdrknight]

We left cable for cheaper streaming alternatives. However, after constant yearly price increases that price advantage has rapidly diminished. I predict within 2-3 years your streaming stack will cost more than the comparable cable bill. I wonder how many are switching back to streaming cable in next few yrs.

 

[QuarterSwede]

We left cable for cheaper streaming alternatives. However, after constant yearly price increases that price advantage has rapidly diminished. I predict within 2-3 years your streaming stack will cost more than the comparable cable bill. I wonder how many are switching back to streaming cable in next few yrs.

The difference now is that you can stop subscribing/only subscribe for a month any time you want and still have access to other streaming services. We do this with certain services and we still don't pay near what we used to with cable 15 years ago when we ditched it.

 

[mk313]

Ah yes, the classic “you should have known this was coming, therefore you shouldn’t complain” argument.
Nobody expected 4.99 to last forever. The question is whether 14.99 is good value today — and that’s where Apple has a problem.
Apple TV has roughly 350 movies and series combined. For broadly similar monthly prices, Paramount+ has around 5× more, HBO Max around 10× more, and Netflix well over 20× more content.
And your Uber analogy actually proves the opposite of what you think: once the price stopped making sense, you used it less. That is exactly what people are saying they’ll do with Apple TV — subscribe for a month, watch what they want, then cancel.
Being “tech-savvy” doesn’t mean applauding every price increase because you understand the business model. Sometimes it just means looking at the price, looking at the competition, and saying: this is simply poor value.

I don't know that Apple actually has a problem here. Time will tell. This forum is definitely not a representative sample of the subscriber base. If too many people do move to monthly, then Apple will have a problem. However, I think way more people are likely to just say 'Eh, it's only $2/month. Not worth my time to cancel the subscription.'

Certainly if you are just looking for one streaming service with the most possible content, then Apple TV is not a good option. However, for certain people, like Formula One Fans or Major League Soccer fans, Apple TV is a great value. The only service I subscribe to on a yearly basis is Peacock. They certainly don't have the largest overall catalog, but they have most of the major pro cycling races, which is important to me. Apple TV has similar niches. Whether they are a good deal or not, depends on what you want to watch, not just the size of the catalog.

 

[mk313]

We left cable for cheaper streaming alternatives. However, after constant yearly price increases that price advantage has rapidly diminished. I predict within 2-3 years your streaming stack will cost more than the comparable cable bill. I wonder how many are switching back to streaming cable in next few yrs.

If you want to watch a really wide variety of content, no doubt that cable is still the way to go. Back in the cable only days, people ket saying that they only watched one or two shows, and didn't want to pay for full cable. The streaming services provide that option. But if you are looking to kind of watch whatever you want, whenever you want, it almost certainly makes sense to subscribe to cable, vs trying to piece together a lot of streaming services.

 

[sjsharksfan12]

If you want to watch a really wide variety of content, no doubt that cable is still the way to go. Back in the cable only days, people ket saying that they only watched one or two shows, and didn't want to pay for full cable. The streaming services provide that option. But if you are looking to kind of watch whatever you want, whenever you want, it almost certainly makes sense to subscribe to cable, vs trying to piece together a lot of streaming services.

I really hate what streaming has done with Sports. You need to go to 4 or more different places to watch your team in a season. Cable made it easier in that regard. I don't really have much of a problem with price increases as so much what they have done in the sports world.

 

[mk313]

I really hate what streaming has done with Sports. You need to go to 4 or more different places to watch your team in a season. Cable made it easier in that regard. I don't really have much of a problem with price increases as so much what they have done in the sports world.

On the one hand, especially for smaller sports, it's been great. You can see competitions that would never have been shown in the past. But definitely for the major sports, especially football, It's like you have to subscribe to every single streaming service if you want to catch all the games.

 

[turbineseaplane]

The difference now is that you can stop subscribing/only subscribe for a month any time you want and still have access to other streaming services. We do this with certain services and we still don't pay near what we used to with cable 15 years ago when we ditched it.

All it's going to take is a business terms change (contracts and/or minimum terms of plans and that entire benefit is washed away.

We'll get there. The prices keep going up and eventually the terms will get tweaked to favor their business interests as well.

Also, the ability to access other streaming services overlooks the fragmentation that's happened with content. There's a whole lot of content you can get in one place only now. Whatever they ask, take it or leave it.

Streaming has brought lots of good, but it's not all roses at all.