Disney and CBS Signing on to Apple TV Subscription Service? Tablet to be 'multimedia gadget'

[powers74]

Even less chance at a normal library then. Unless you like CDs of bands youve never even heard of.

I guess I fall into that category.

Orrrrrrr, it can just include a slot DVD player/burner and you can watch your content on that. How about that? Ah, but that doesn't make Apple and content providers money by tying it down to download/streaming. Smart, Apple.

Never in a million years. MBA? No chance in hell. Thinness.

Net neutrality doesn't help when the company that owns the pipes also owns and controls the content.

"Net neutrality" won't help much of anything.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I'm not going into a political debate but have you seen how hard they are pushing net neutrality?

They may be putting on a good show, but actions speak louder than words. If Congress was going to do something with pricing of services (such as support a lower price players stomping on the toes of these Goliaths), you wouldn't have lower-priced players getting eaten up by the Goliaths. There wouldn't be approvals for Goliaths to so dominate that they can be the only provider in some major areas, or 1 of only 2 in others. The recent television spectrum auction- which could have created major new competitors for the likes of Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, etc- would not have been able to be won by those very same players. Etc.

As it is now many of these companies operate as monopolies with the consumer having only one choice of a provider. It is in these situations where gov't intervention is needed.

That's exactly right, but where do you see the government actually putting the squeeze on these guys? For example, have you heard of any cable bills getting lower? Are cell phone contracts illegal? Any taxation to discourage predatory practices with these players? Any tax incentives for new competitors to enter the space? Any prevention of these Goliath's from gobbling up smaller, lower-priced competitors? Etc.

Yes, it is the role of good Government to break up monopolies. When will our Government do that job? I just see these few companies getting bigger and bigger.

I think they're pissed off but what are they going to do?

They're not pissed off until something like this would start really taking hold. And if it did- such that they started noticing it in lower revenues in their cable/satt division revenues- they will raise rates in their broadband division to compensate (justified by "higher volume" users, etc).

I've already described outcomes and they will lose at every corner. They are going to have to eat this.

The only way they "eat this" if it becomes an issue for their revenues is if they are forced to do so by the Government taking a stand against them charging more for (broadband) services they deliver. I have serious doubts our Government- democrats or republicans- would make such a move (other than maybe some lip service) in that direction. But dream on if you believe it will.

They will up the prices but it will still be affordable compared to the pricing of having everything through your provider if the rumors are true (and the WSJ is pretty accurate). It will not go past $75 or they will get no sympathy from a Congress or judge when we are just starting to break out of a recession. Their options are limited.

Let's assume for a moment that you are right about a $75 broadband price as a maximum. $75 for broadband + $30 (rumored price for this service) + phone is probably higher than many pay now for cable/satt + broadband + phone. Where's the savings if broadband is at $75. And I'm seriously doubting a full cable replacement service from Apple at only $30/month by the way.

Are others reading this thread ready for $75 broadband plus whatever this costs from Apple plus phone?

As far as no sympathy from Congress, are you kidding? Congress offers most sympathy to the powerful companies, because that's where the flow of maximum lobby dollars come from. Sure our elected officials will offer plenty of lip service on behalf of the poor citizens of this country, but then do nothing to actually support that lip service.

As to your first paragraph, can you tell me what victories these companies have had?

Are you kidding? What losses have they had? Al-a-carte proposals? White space spectrum proposals (though there's still minor hope for that one)? Lower-priced player merger/acquisition after acquisition approved? AT&T basically getting to buy itself back into corporate domination again? Verizon getting to buy itself to domination? How many broadband players serve any given area? When was the last time subscription prices fell (you know they're not continually building out infrastructure anymore)? Etc.

I would like to live in the world that you live in, but I mostly see the big getting bigger, Congress putting on a good show but not actually doing anything (whether it is run by either party), and the big winners from very occasional Government action rarely being the middle & lower class public (again whether Government is run by Dems or Repubs).

I stand by the concept that even if such a service comes to be, it won't replace cable/satt at a significant savings if it has to flow through cable/satt controlled pipes. I'm guessing it will be a significant compromise in programming availability, or pricing that has been discussed is only promotional pricing (much like how cable or satt starts out at $29.95/month) for a limited time, or some other compromise along these lines.

For a person that can live with the result, it might work for them. However, if too many can live with the result that it actually cuts into cable/satt revenues in a meaningful way, they will make up for those shortfalls in higher broadband rates. Without competitors, there is no one to hold the line on broadband pricing to take business from those who sell broadband and television programming distribution.

 

[jaw04005]

Yes, they distributed it to fox, which can veto additional distribution (since fox is paying for the exclusive right to broadcast it, at least without delay).

We know from past history that what you claim is not true.

During the NBC (Universal) dispute, House did not receive any new episodes on iTunes for more than a year, despite airing on Fox and being available on Hulu and Amazon Unbox. If Fox controlled off-network distribution for House, they would have left House on iTunes.

There were specific articles on House itself since it’s distributed by Universal Media Studios.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/97190-New_Episodes_of_Fox_s_House_Won_t_Be_on_iTunes.php

In fact, some NBC shows (at the time) including Scrubs remained on iTunes because they were produced/distributed by ABC Studios (Disney).

As pointed out above, it generally goes like this: production company creates show, licenses show to distribution company and distribution company takes care of distribution (broadcast network, cable syndication, Internet syndication, etc).

Once the distribution deal expires (or parts of it), it’s up to the production company to make another agreement. That’s why shows like Roseanne and Frasier aren’t on iTunes.

However, many times the production and distribution company are the same. For example, Grey’s Anatomy and Private Practice belong to ABC Studios.

Edit: According to IMDB Pro, Universal controls all worldwide media distribution rights for House.

"House M.D.: The Jerk (#3.23)" (2007) ... Distributor (2007) (worldwide) (all media)

http://www.imdb.com/company/co0131785/

 

[Gasu E.]

I believe in America those who own a thing can charge whatever they want for it.

Actually, this is not true in all cases, and certainly not for cable TV providers. Typically, businesses that require access to public property, or use a scarce regulated resource, have to agree to government regulation in return for using that property or resources. In the case of cable companies, most need to string miles of cable over public property. They do not have "natural right" to this access. They must apply for the access, typically to a municipality, and agree to regulations in return. Most municipalities limit the number of cable companies that have access, in order to avoid the chaos and unsightliness of too many wires, awarding an approved provider a semi-monopoly by government fiat.

 

[dnguyen]

is apple tv starting to pick up pace?

 

[globalhemp]

Netgear Push2TV

Has anyone used the new Netgear Push2TV?

This uses a new Intel Wireless Display (WiDi). Any content on your laptop or desktop can be displayed on your television. No Apple TV required.