Bloomberg: Apple to Buy Older Shows for TV+ in Bid to Challenge Netflix

[archer75]

The whole streaming thing is out of hand. Reminds me of when there many computer makers in the beginning. Commodore, Tandy, TI, Timex Sinclair, IBM,etc. Over the years most are gone. I would love to cut the cord but buying individual services adds up and moving from one to another is cumbersome. I was offered Apple TV when I bought a new phone. But without apple tv the place I could watch was on my phone.

I have Xfinity and months ago they dropped TCM from my package. I had it as part of my package for almost 30 years. They said no one watched it and they moved to a Sports Package for $10/ month. My guess is ATT owns it and they wanted more money. I can get the ATT streaming service but of course many channels I want are not there. So I have to go fish for other streaming services.

It is probably a generational thing. A grew up with ABC, CBS and NBC and they were totally free. Now a pay Xfinity close to $200/month for TV, Internet and phone and get to watch more commercials they I ever did.

Sorry for the rant

The ATV app is available on many TV's and devices. You don't necessarily have to have an ATV.

And I'm like you, I actually owned a Tandy. And remember having a black and white TV and only 3 channels. Streaming is getting a bit out of hand as everyone wants to run their own streaming service now. The good thing is there's no contracts and you can easily cancel. Subscribe, watch, cancel. So you can manage the costs. And it's easy to get some services for free as promos through other services. I get Netflix and ATV+ for free. And have amazon prime only because I pay for prime shipping.

Xfinity is a rip off. Cancel that ASAP. You just need internet and you can get everything you ever wanted through that. Though Comcast does have a monthly data cap. I cut the cord nearly a decade ago and never looked back.

 

[Techwatcher]

Did Apple just realize that TV+ only had like 5 shows total?

 

[compwiz1202]

A hostile takeover of ViacomCBS would be much cheaper than Disney. Apple would have an instant catalog and be able to merge two streaming services.

REGARDLESS, they HAVE to clear up the confusing nomenclature
- Apple TV+ (most people don't say 'plus) - the streaming service
- Apple TV - the IOS app
- Apple TV - the Mac app
- Apple TV - the set-top device
- Apple TV - the app for Apple TV and other TVs?

- Apple TV - the breakfast cereal

 

[w5jck]

Cluttered and confusing interface, and none of the current shows even appeal to me. I bought a new iPad mini 5 and an Apple TV 4K so I have a year of Apple TV+ free, but nothing worth watching that is actually Apple's. Being so late to the gate, I doubt Apple will find much older content still available to purchase that is worth watching. Everyone else already scarfed that up long ago. In the future they might be able to outbid Netflix and others on newer content as it comes available, but for now they seem to have screwed themselves royally. I guess they thought the Apple fan club people would just buy the service and be happy. But there are a lot of people like me who own a lot of Apple devices but don't care for Apple services. I think it is telling to know that I use my Apple TV 4K to stream pretty much everything but Apple TV+. I stream Netflix, Hulu, Philo, Amazon Prime, and several other services on my Apple TV 4K, but rarely stream Apple TV+ because there isn’t anything therein I care to watch.

 

[johnnytravels]

Wearables?

Hmm, do you think that the Apple Watch (or any smart watch) is a product that has been widely adopted because it really solved a problem people didn't have (or even a problem people didn't know they had )?
It's selling well, that's for sure, compared to other watches, but it's too clearly a companion piece to other products as well, and at a steeper price than other companion pieces (Airpods for example).

What I mean by ‘exuding stagnation’ is not that products are not selling well but rather than little is happening between refreshes of product lines and that Apple is very slow at adopting ideas that are floating around in abundance because they so clearly have a bigger focus on nickel-and-diming their customers now, and more than they ever had before.

Recent spikes in deteriorating software quality and too blatant rehashing of what's worked before are clear indicators in my opinion. They could give us bezel-less MBP Pro 14's with dedicated graphics no problem but instead they choose to simply let the current model run for another year (or two? or three?) because they need to make up on profits lost due to the repairs they had to perform on keyboards and screens in the predecessor models. I am not saying that this is wrong, it's just not what a company striving to be perpetually recognized as a leader in mobile computing does.

And it's even more apparent with their services. Apple Music is doing well because they simply had to follow what competitors are doing. The goal is to simply have as much music available as possible and it's easy because the music industry has always been relying on being put together with all of their competitors. They failed at establishing a viable online book store (even with price colluding), they didn't even try to make a lasting name for themselves in the messenger and video chat sphere (the fact that in many US media, private video calls are somewhat synonymous with Facetime is an insular phenomenon and due to the equally insular high adoption rate of the iPhone in the US), and have launched unsuccessful news, video streaming and games platforms, all mostly dead on arrival and without any significance a year or two into the respective services. The similarity between all their media services: They tried to ‘do something different’ without spending the necessary money to really stand out. With Apple Music it somewhat worked (at least in the US) because it replaces another service (e.g. Spotify) at no disadvantage to the user. With iBooks (locked to Apple devices), News (paying for information that is too often free), TV+ (very limited offering at too high a price compared to any other service; offset a bit by doling out free first years to hardware buyers) and Arcade (exclusive selection simply not on par with most of the best offerings outside of the subscription), it always comes at a disadvantage or at too high a price for too little in return.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind what they are doing personally, they re just like any other company. It just feels very much like they actually don't want to do any of it, keep reaping their iPhone profits and pleasing shareholders looking for cash outs. It feels very much like a company offering products to maintain a status quo with the least effort possible.

 

[DoctorTech]

Oh God they've given up already ?

In all seriousness, it would take a massive feat to even compete with Netflix, let alone overtake them. They can't even get their naming/app conventions right. Why can I access some Apple TV 'Channels' on the Apple TV, but not on my Mac's Apple TV app? Why is their app the same name as the device?

I just don't think Apple TV really solves anything, but is just becoming another cable box where it's all grand 'searching' for content, but then find out you have to purchase a whole bunch of subscriptions to watch them from different services.

I agree the app is confusing and needs to be redesigned.

I can only speak for myself but in general I have been underwhelmed by Netflix originals. I really liked "House of Cards" but it ended a couple years ago and now "Patriot Act" is about all that I watch on Netflix. Most of Netflix's original content has been in the quasi-reality show genre that I don't care for. In contrast, Apple's original content (Morning Show, See, Servant, and Mythic Quest) is much higher quality. I hope Apple doesn't shift their focus away from their own content in an attempt to acquire a bigger catalog.

 

[iAssimilated]

Wishlist for Apple TV+: Get the rights to NFL Sunday Ticket when its current contract with DirectTV expires and I would be happy to pay $5 for life!

 

[4487549]

To everyone who said that Apple shouldn't buy Netflix...

 

[glindon]

My point was... did Apple really decide in the middle of 2020 that they needed to buy back-catalog content? Did they not know that from the beginning?

We all knew it.

I only mentioned Disney because we know they have a huge decades-long back-catalog. I could have just as easily mentioned Netflix, Hulu, and HBO who also have giant back-catalogs.

Imagine if Apple had launched Apple TV+ with their original content *AND* had a few licensed properties from the start. You know... a "Friends" or a "Seinfeld" or whatever.

That would have put them in a better position today.

It's just funny that Apple is six months into ATV+ and they're just now considering buying back-catalog stuff. Seems odd.

They could have done something like HBO where there is a rotating catalogue of movies to watch each month.

 

[mcfrazieriv]

This is why I was completely against this idea of Apple TV+. It has literally no focus. Once you open the floodgates, you begin to spend billions on curating, licensing or buying [wars] content. Instead of pumping those billions into hardware or software advancement, you're feeding the wallets of producers and actors.

I cannot imagine someone pondering ownership of an Apple product vs competitor because they have access to Apple TV+ especially now that this app is available on other branded smart tvs.

What's next? Apple turning into a music production company to produce rap and rock music? Or a snack and beverage company so I can eat Apple popcorn during the TV shows?

 

[mogga71]

I agree the app is confusing and needs to be redesigned.

I can only speak for myself but in general I have been underwhelmed by Netflix originals. I really liked "House of Cards" but it ended a couple years ago and now "Patriot Act" is about all that I watch on Netflix. Most of Netflix's original content has been in the quasi-reality show genre that I don't care for. In contrast, Apple's original content (Morning Show, See, Servant, and Mythic Quest) is much higher quality. I hope Apple doesn't shift their focus away from their own content in an attempt to acquire a bigger catalog.

TBH I think you very likely are just speaking for yourself. Netflix has at least 10 fantastic original series. Example ... Ozark, Narcos, Stranger Things, Money Heist, Haunting Of Hill House, Mindhunter.

The Morning Show and The Servant were both good IMHO but nowhere near the Netflix levels. Netflix is a 8/10 , Apple TV+ 1/10.

 

[Geronimo]

Given all the money Apple has, if they really want to bulk up the Apple TV+ catalog, why not just buy an established media company rather than doing small one-off deals here and there for a few old shows and movies? As suggested by someone else already, buy ViacomCBS (which owns Showtime, CBS, Paramount, MTV, Nickelodeon, Comedy Central, etc.). Or maybe Sony Pictures, which has a large library of both films and TV series going back decades. Only other option I can think of that would make any sense is MGM, which has a smallish film library (mainly James Bond) plus Epix (which is a $6/mo subscription video service with far more content than Apple TV+).

 

[petvas]

I like AppleTV+ but I would like to see a dedicated app. I don't like the approach Apple has taken, integrating the AppleTV+ content in the AppleTV, together with everything else. It makes for a weird experience.

 

[StoneJack]

Hmm, do you think that the Apple Watch (or any smart watch) is a product that has been widely adopted because it really solved a problem people didn't have (or even a problem people didn't know they had )?
It's selling well, that's for sure, compared to other watches, but it's too clearly a companion piece to other products as well, and at a steeper price than other companion pieces (Airpods for example).

What I mean by ‘exuding stagnation’ is not that products are not selling well but rather than little is happening between refreshes of product lines and that Apple is very slow at adopting ideas that are floating around in abundance because they so clearly have a bigger focus on nickel-and-diming their customers now, and more than they ever had before.

Recent spikes in deteriorating software quality and too blatant rehashing of what's worked before are clear indicators in my opinion. They could give us bezel-less MBP Pro 14's with dedicated graphics no problem but instead they choose to simply let the current model run for another year (or two? or three?) because they need to make up on profits lost due to the repairs they had to perform on keyboards and screens in the predecessor models. I am not saying that this is wrong, it's just not what a company striving to be perpetually recognized as a leader in mobile computing does.

And it's even more apparent with their services. Apple Music is doing well because they simply had to follow what competitors are doing. The goal is to simply have as much music available as possible and it's easy because the music industry has always been relying on being put together with all of their competitors. They failed at establishing a viable online book store (even with price colluding), they didn't even try to make a lasting name for themselves in the messenger and video chat sphere (the fact that in many US media, private video calls are somewhat synonymous with Facetime is an insular phenomenon and due to the equally insular high adoption rate of the iPhone in the US), and have launched unsuccessful news, video streaming and games platforms, all mostly dead on arrival and without any significance a year or two into the respective services. The similarity between all their media services: They tried to ‘do something different’ without spending the necessary money to really stand out. With Apple Music it somewhat worked (at least in the US) because it replaces another service (e.g. Spotify) at no disadvantage to the user. With iBooks (locked to Apple devices), News (paying for information that is too often free), TV+ (very limited offering at too high a price compared to any other service; offset a bit by doling out free first years to hardware buyers) and Arcade (exclusive selection simply not on par with most of the best offerings outside of the subscription), it always comes at a disadvantage or at too high a price for too little in return.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind what they are doing personally, they re just like any other company. It just feels very much like they actually don't want to do any of it, keep reaping their iPhone profits and pleasing shareholders looking for cash outs. It feels very much like a company offering products to maintain a status quo with the least effort possible.

I think you are so bright, better than Cook, CEO of largest valued company in the world. I think you can be the CEO..oh wait

 

[dazz87]

They have to....Their current content is trash........Nobody signing back up after their free year expired.

 

[Wolfpup]

So far I like what Ive seen of the service pretty, well, and like the price, but I wish they’d use ads, either to lower the price or at least hold it steady.

sure as hell beats quibi ?

 

[The Phazer]

Apple is spending $6 billion on original shows and trying to beat Disney+ to market, reports FT

Apple has spent more than $6 billion on original TV shows and movies for its forthcoming Apple TV+ service, according to a Financial Times report on Monday.

www.cnbc.com

6 Billion. And that was a year ago. Probably closer to 10 Billion now after all the new contracts and first look deals.

Where did you get the 2 Billion figure?

The FT report that article links to notes that the $6 billion figure is over three years.

Six divided by three is two.

 

[AtomicDusk]

Things I'd like to see changed to get me to consider subscribing after my first year:
1. Rename the service, the device and the Apps. It's all pretty confusing.
2. Stop showing me 'Channels' for things I'm not subscribed to.
3. Improve overall UI. It was fine when it only like 4 shows, but now its painful to navigate.

Aw who am I kidding, I can probably subscribe to it anyway. The average show on  TV is better than Netflix or Hulu, to me. Yes they have more but the others have less consistency. I'll just swap between Netflix, Hulu and  TV+ each month or two whenever I get bored.

 

[johnnytravels]

I think you are so bright, better than Cook, CEO of largest valued company in the world. I think you can be the CEO..oh wait

Funny! Very!
Especially since I pointed out numerous times that my issue is not with the financial/business side of things but with the product design and delivery.

 

[D.T.]

A hostile takeover of ViacomCBS would be much cheaper than Disney. Apple would have an instant catalog and be able to merge two streaming services.

REGARDLESS, they HAVE to clear up the confusing nomenclature
- Apple TV+ (most people don't say 'plus) - the streaming service
- Apple TV - the IOS app
- Apple TV - the Mac app
- Apple TV - the set-top device
- Apple TV - the app for Apple TV and other TVs?

To compound the confusion, I hear that inside Apple, everyone is required to refer to each other as Apple TV ...




Great post BTW, I really wonder what "free agent" content is available? All the major stuff seems to be either tied up into their parent service, or exclusive (at least for now) to other "open" streaming services (Netlfix, etc.)

 

[Herrpod]

I like AppleTV+ but I would like to see a dedicated app. I don't like the approach Apple has taken, integrating the AppleTV+ content in the AppleTV, together with everything else. It makes for a weird experience.

There is a dedicated app/channel for ATV+ if all you want to see is the ATV+ content.

 

[Abazigal]

To everyone who said that Apple shouldn't buy Netflix...

Apple still shouldn’t.

 

[Max_B]

As an European "cinephile" (is "film buff" the right translation), I wish Apple would buy a back catalog of Indies movies (Sundance and such), with good digital quality. I love the overall quality of streaming through Apple TV (the device). There are already many mainstream VOD/stream services and too few tools to dig up nuggets out of the junk pile.

 

[Abazigal]

What I mean by ‘exuding stagnation’ is not that products are not selling well but rather than little is happening between refreshes of product lines and that Apple is very slow at adopting ideas that are floating around in abundance because they so clearly have a bigger focus on nickel-and-diming their customers now, and more than they ever had before.

The key reason for this is quite simple - Apple is a design company, not a technology one. What this means is that at Apple, designers calling the shots, and are in charge of searching for and having technology made to serve the product experience, not engineers excited about about new hot tech and trying to turn it into a product. Apple Glasses vs. foldable phones is the latest example of Apple's design culture leading to an entirely different product than what engineering-led companies are doing.

This is probably also why product lines like the Mac are being refreshed so slowly. It's hard to be passionate about a product category which in Apple's eyes does not represent the future of personal computing. The bulk of Apple's attention and resources are likely devoted to wearables, plus other new product categories we haven't seen yet (such as self-driving cars). At the same time, Apple finds itself having to keep devoting resources to support a niche market for legacy users, even as recent updates like the Mac Pro show that they are not ready to leave their pro users high and dry just yet, if only for the simple fact that you still need Macs to create apps for iOS.

I do believe that Apple was already moving mountains (even before this whole pandemic) just to sustain annual refreshes of the iPhone and Apple Watch. Every year, Apple basically has to maintain 4 operating systems (iOS, macOS, tvOS, watchOS), update their hardware, run the App Store, and manage a portfolio of services. It's seriously a lot on their plate. The seemingly lacklustre list of new features we get with these products every year belie the sheer effort it takes to refine them and make them happen.

So if product refreshes seem slow in coming, it's likely because Apple is focused on selling tools capable of fostering superior experiences, not just new technology for the sake of it. And very often, this entails waiting for the right technology to become available as much as inventing it. You can't just look at what the industry is doing on totality, then compare Apple to other companies like that and conclude that Apple is lagging behind just because it hasn't jumped on the bandwagon like they have.

Instead, I find it more effective to first start with Apple, and then I analyse the industry that Apple operates in, rather than it other way round. I know it sounds backwards, but it's the only way to be fair by allowing Apple’s unique attributes to speak for themselves and recognise how Apple is able to set themselves apart from the competition.

 

[Chi Blue]

Apple is purchasing older movies and shows for its TV+ streaming service in a bid to build a back catalog of content that puts it in a better position to rival the huge libraries available on Netflix, Hulu, and Disney+, reports Bloomberg.

Apple reportedly plans to keep its television streaming service focused on original shows, and hasn't bought any huge franchises or blockbusters for its back catalog, according to sources cited in the report. Nevertheless, it's a statement of intent from Apple and an acknowledgement that successful streaming services like Netflix and Disney+ tend to have a mix of old and new shows to keep audiences coming back.

Netflix for example has thousands of titles that viewers can choose from, while Apple TV+ currently has fewer than 30 original movies and shows in its catalog. As the report notes, however, at $4.99 per month, Apple TV+ costs half the price of a standard Netflix subscription.

Another advantage Apple TV+ has over its rivals is that it's free for a year for anyone who buys an Apple device, and students who have a student subscription to ?Apple Music? for $4.99 per month can also get access to ?Apple TV?+ at no additional charge, so the company can expose viewers to its television service before they even sign up.

Apple has so far avoided buying rights to old shows, and has instead looked to host individual services through its TV app in the form of Apple TV Channels, which include the likes of HBO, Starz, SHOWTIME, and EPIX. However, according to Bloomberg's sources, this approach has yielded mixed results.
Compare that to Disney+, which signed up over 10 million users on the day it launched in the U.S. and has since attracted over 50 million subscribers. Netflix meanwhile has 182.8 million subscribers globally, making it one of the world's largest entertainment services, and the company added nearly 16 million customers in the first quarter of this year.

• How to Subscribe to Apple TV Channels Using the Apple TV App

Today's news suggests something of a turnaround for the company's plans for Apple TV+. During Apple's February shareholder meeting, CEO Tim Cook was asked why Apple didn't make an effort to get the rights to the upcoming Friends reunion show that will be airing on HBO Max.

Cook said that recycled content is "not what Apple TV+ is about." ?Apple TV?+ is "about original programming," he said. "It doesn't feel right for Apple to just go out and take a rerun."

Article Link: Bloomberg: Apple to Buy Older Shows for TV+ in Bid to Challenge Netflix

Apple needs to get their app on more platforms. All TVs and DVD players need the app. A Comcast Cable box needs the app. That will do a lot.