Hell, why license content when they could probably just buy all of MGM, LOL. MGM is basically a rights holder/licensor at this point anyway. It basically doesn't exist as an independent studio anymore. They don't even own their own golden age library.
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.
Bloomberg: Apple to Buy Older Shows for TV+ in Bid to Challenge Netflix
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hell, why license content when they could probably just buy all of MGM, LOL. MGM is basically a rights holder/licensor at this point anyway. It basically doesn't exist as an independent studio anymore. They don't even own their own golden age library.
How about tagging along, PronHub, Pixar, WB and Universal Studio?Why don't they just buy Disney?
I am sure you are somehow right. However, the thing is, they used to be different and aren't anymore, because they haven't scaled up their workforce with their capital increase.
You mentioned “refined experience”. But clearly, for several years, the opposite has been the case. Apple apparently only has enough manpower (and proper systems in place for handling development tasks) to either address ‘general stability’ or ‘a few new features’. With all their cash, they are incapable of achieving that, and this is precisely because they are not really product oriented atm but stock market investor oriented.
I totally get that this is what companies generally do, try not to lose stock value. The problem is that Apple has grown so fast without scaling up properly that now every big investment that does affect the stock value negatively (because it is not calculated to produce some financial gain very soon) is not made.
And that is beginning to show in their products.
The number of times they have had to redesign apps to make them less confusing, you think they would have learned their lesson with Apple Music but no. How can such a rich company be so incompetent.
Not a bad idea if the shows have good quality but they need to increase the available devices to watch it. Come on Apple, stop making war with Google and implement an Android app and chromecast compatibility (airplay is only available in a few devices). And it would be also smart to create an app for gaming consoles, there are tons of users watching shows in these devices.
They have right now a nice amount of ATV+ users due to the fact they have activated a new Apple product, it's time not to loose them by giving the possibility of using different devices.
They have right now a nice amount of ATV+ users due to the fact they have activated a new Apple product, it's time not to loose them by giving the possibility of using different devices.
I’d compare how many shows you actively watch in each service.
I find them all surprisingly similar in proportion of my viewing time.
In any case I hope whatever deals they make they can get worldwide rights. I have my doubts though.
[automerge]1589973087[/automerge]
Definitely.
It doesn’t help that AppleTV app on AppleTV is a great cross service search and management system, but AppleTV on Sony(?) just has Apple content.
Perhaps if the AppleTV device defaulted to the AppleTV app it’d help with the confusion, with a separate clear option to switch to “apps”?
Exactly.
Apple TV should be the streaming service and app (The entire app should require a subscription to even be functional—it's incredibly confusing as is what paying for the service even gets you. The consolidation feature of the app alone could be worth a subscription to many customers. All your favorite streaming platforms, plus a whole lot more (if they start licensing), in one app.)
Apple TV+ should be the standalone box.
You make a good point. I am probably not the target demographic for a lot of Netflix's offerings. My daughters (both in their 20s) really like Stranger Things and I have heard co-workers saying a lot of positive things about Narcos. I had forgotten all about Mindhunter. I saw a promo for that show and it looked pretty good, I will have to check it out.
I've already been doing that for the past couple years. We get Netflix for 2 months, binge watch only what's on there, then drop it, then go to Hulu for 1 month, CBS for 1 month, and so forth. These services keep all your settings and history after dropping and re-subscribing anyways, so why not?
We don't do that for Disney+, because we got in on the 3 year deal. We have Apple for a year, and Amazon Prime Videos we have the whole time we're an Amazon Prime Member.
Models like Amazon's or Disney's, where we're 'locked in' should do better in the future, instead of things that go month-to-month like Hulu, CBS, Netflix.
No, the box can be called the Apple Box.
I still think Apple should release their own TV (which in that case would be the Apple TV. Content being Apple Stream). Hate to have to go through Samsung’s UI to change the tv settings (such as brightness)
Yeah but the rights holders could still cut deals to Apple (or other streamers) for exhibition windows of older and popular shows. Carve it out of their own schedule and make money off it somewhere else for awhile, bring it back home after a little gap with a pitch to new subscribers, run a promo "In Case You Keep Missing It: now only at [rights holder's channel]" etc.
I think another finer point that may have gone under discussed amidst all this "Apple should acquire X" chatter is that Apple is likely purchasing extra content to fill out their TV+ catalogue because all filming has pretty much grounded to a halt during the pandemic period. Once everything is back to normal, Apple will go back to filming subsequent seasons of their tentpole shows and their rate of acquisition will likely slow down.
I still don't think Apple has any aspirations of becoming the next Netflix or Disney, so I don't think they will go down that route of owning an entire library of back content. Their business model is still the same. Focus on compelling storytelling to get users to go into the TV+ app where they can sell more iTunes content and streaming channels, and in turn use this as a hook to incentivise media companies to support the TV app, because that's where the attention is.
I still don't think Apple has any aspirations of becoming the next Netflix or Disney, so I don't think they will go down that route of owning an entire library of back content. Their business model is still the same. Focus on compelling storytelling to get users to go into the TV+ app where they can sell more iTunes content and streaming channels, and in turn use this as a hook to incentivise media companies to support the TV app, because that's where the attention is.
Apple: your late..
Netflix was first,, no over-taking allowed. I do like companies who think "This is new, perhaps we can challenge others" when we know who ever has been in this the longest, often wins.
It doesn't prevent them from trying, and it's good to see some competition anyway (... even if they are in last place).
Netflix was first,, no over-taking allowed. I do like companies who think "This is new, perhaps we can challenge others" when we know who ever has been in this the longest, often wins.
It doesn't prevent them from trying, and it's good to see some competition anyway (... even if they are in last place).