cuz if TV+ turns out to be just meh, or a flop, his career would go down the toilet with it.
Freedom can't always be bought
Freedom can't always be bought
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.
J.J. Abrams Declined Apple's $500 Million Offer Because it Would Have Restricted Bad Robot Productions to Apple TV+
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, I mean how dare an artist put their work above money.
I mean, he's put money above everything during his career. He only has a backbone now because he's already rich.
JJ Abrams has produced a lot of meh and bad content. I think he should have taken this deal. Just my opinion.
One thing; Apple TV+ isn't limited to Apple devices, it will be accessible to anyone on the web and specific TV brands like Samsung. Apple is working to open this up to more outlets, they need numbers in order to have any leverage on other companies to justify the exclusivity rights.
I seriously doubt WarnerMedia is going to permit their own content to be available on any streaming services eventually as they're already gearing up to have their own streaming service.
As for the movie theatre revenue, does anyone know the revenue comparison between the box office and streaming services?
I seriously doubt WarnerMedia is going to permit their own content to be available on any streaming services eventually as they're already gearing up to have their own streaming service.
As for the movie theatre revenue, does anyone know the revenue comparison between the box office and streaming services?
Last edited:
Greedy how? This is how streaming services work. That's how they get you to buy-in. Why would anyone do Disney+ if they let Netflix and others stream the same content?
Except Apple content will be available in lots of places. I think it was more about Apple not having any legacy content Abrams can work with.
Geez, when am I going find someone offering me half a billion up front?
It kinda shows Apples desperation though. I do hope it’s a successful venture; partly for the sake of the money being spent. Whether you like it or not, ever iPhone, MacBook Pro, iMac, Apple service gives Apple this level of power to spend. Yes, I know I got my end of the transaction, it’s just that there is a bit ‘throw money at it’ and they will come feeling.
It kinda shows Apples desperation though. I do hope it’s a successful venture; partly for the sake of the money being spent. Whether you like it or not, ever iPhone, MacBook Pro, iMac, Apple service gives Apple this level of power to spend. Yes, I know I got my end of the transaction, it’s just that there is a bit ‘throw money at it’ and they will come feeling.
How are you defining platforms? I’m guessing whatever they do will be available on mobile devices/streaming platforms like Roku, Apple TV.
The first one I meant Apple software platforms. The second one is a typo, I meant services, not platforms. Corrected my post.
I mean bad robot has made a dozen blockbuster theatrical releases - Apple has never released a movie in theaters. Seems a little early to try and force these exclusivity deals with companies that have been in the game far longer.
Last edited:
Maybe. Maybe not. But it certainly means he gets to choose how he earns his money and instead of being locked into Apple for X years. He's had quite a bit of success already selling shows with his name on them to various production companies and studios. The deal with Apple would end that.
This is just wrong.
I think you meant to say Apple TV+ but in any case it's wrong:
1. Apple TV+ will be available on iPhone, iPad, MacOs devices AND Web Browser here: tv.apple.com when it launches
2. Apple TV can be purchased by anyone. You don't need an iPhone for it to work.
Yea but it's a very good risk to take for Apple. They can burn that money easily without any serious hit to their pockets. Imagine if they did in fact win him over, it's a big win.
If not, meh, who cares.
I love Apple, in general, but I feel as though the whole "original content" aspect of AppleTV will prove to be a huge fail for them. AppleNews+ is another "product" Apple could have done without. I tried it and just couldn't see any value. "Go with what you know" would be good advice for Apple, at this point, I think.
Samsamg TVs initially with Apple TV app and I'm sure Apple is working with other companies on Apple TV apps.
I don't find the guy all that talented anyways
The Star Treks reboots are ok at best and maybe I just think that because I'm not a Trekkie / strongly dislike the direction of new Star Wars save for Solo.. but his other efforts? Lame!
The Star Treks reboots are ok at best and maybe I just think that because I'm not a Trekkie / strongly dislike the direction of new Star Wars save for Solo.. but his other efforts? Lame!
Last edited:
Yells as the visual effects department: "Dang it we need more lens flare!!!"
This has nothing to do with greed. They offered a high price for exclusivity because they felt it was worth it. J.J. Abrams decided that he could make more if he was allowed to sell his projects to anyone as he wished.
Except they still get J.J. Abrams produced projects, just did not have to pay him half a billion dollars upfront.
Apple should pay him $500M to bring back Fringe.
They didn't miss out. JJ Abrams will still be producing content for AppleTV+ on an ongoing per project basis. They didn't lose nothing, other than the exclusivity they asked for. It didn't hurt to ask. He said no to exclusivity, but he'll still work for them.
How is that putting work above money? He’s putting differently structure money ahead of apple’s money.
This would have been a lot more effective in promoting ATV+ than signing Oprah to an "undisclosed" deal for depressing content.
She's also done next to nothing for SiriusXM.
She's also done next to nothing for SiriusXM.