No pump, but actual uptrend and no looking back. Apple stock is awesome and will continue all the way to $300 per share a year from now. Watch!
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.
Morgan Stanley Predicts Apple TV+ Could Be a $9 Billion Business by 2025
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Maybe they shouldn't...remains to be seen. OTOH, it'll be a multi-billion dollar operation and it's not so easy to just make those.
This stuff is made at independent studios by independent people and just licensed to Apple, so their attention shouldn't be affected away from anything else, whether it's iMac or Titan.
It doesn't matter if you and me are convinced or not, with the time we spent analyzing this, with the data that was available to us.
It does matter that the leadership at Apple, who grew their business into a trillion dollar company, with the hours and hours of meetings and discussions they had, looking at the much superior data that was available to them, are convinced.
I think it will be successful if they can avoid putting an Apple spin on anything and just focusing on good content. Hire the best writers, directors, and actors and let them do what they do. If Apple can get out of the way and just finance, manage the platform and marketing, they'll be fine.
I don't know where analyst get these numbers from. Apple Music has 60 million paying subscribers and it came out about 4 years ago. HBO Now has over 4 million paying subscribers and it came out 4 years ago.
Yeah gee I helped kickstart a whole new Apple death knell club behind that. /S
My big dilemma is trying to decide whether to launch my trial sub with the launch of the + or wait a little longer (til after I pay my land tax) and get it for a year "free" with a needed upgrade of either my laptop or my iPad. First world problems, wow.
There was a video piece by Joanna Stern in the WSJ the other day talking about how we may all end up subscribing to so much stuff there's not enough time to make use of it all, and a lot of it used to be "goods" but is now turned into "services" instead.
Like before maybe buying a movie you know you're going to rewatch a couple times a year, versus now streaming it every time you want to see it but having to pay for that service by the month regardless of what you watch or if you even watch anything.
It is a challenge to figure out whether we can end up getting our money's worth out of all the subs. But Joanna Stern is probably right we could be surprised if we actually sit down and add up all the little 4.99 here and 8.99 there...
Like before maybe buying a movie you know you're going to rewatch a couple times a year, versus now streaming it every time you want to see it but having to pay for that service by the month regardless of what you watch or if you even watch anything.
It is a challenge to figure out whether we can end up getting our money's worth out of all the subs. But Joanna Stern is probably right we could be surprised if we actually sit down and add up all the little 4.99 here and 8.99 there...
I too thought its stupid and for $5/m they won't make a dime... until I ran the numbers.
$5*100M= $0.5B per month.Thats $6B a year.
the numbers are realistic since I believe that is the number of Netflix users, in the future more people will jump to subscription video, and you can easily gaine 10-20M users in huge countries like China and India which have 1B population.
$5*100M= $0.5B per month.Thats $6B a year.
the numbers are realistic since I believe that is the number of Netflix users, in the future more people will jump to subscription video, and you can easily gaine 10-20M users in huge countries like China and India which have 1B population.
That’s actually what concerns me. They grew the company into a trillion dollar company by selling great products.
Now they’re spending “hours and hours” focusing on a services sector business that’s away from their core competency, while their main product lines languish.
You don’t understand business strategy. Apple is executing the natural next step after a wildly successful hardware push that saw the device count grow to 1.4B. That doesn’t grow forever. Once you have the base, you have to monetize and keep people in the ecosystem.
They'll still sell a lot of hardware, but services will keep people spending and coming back for hardware updates.
[automerge]1571979167[/automerge]
Services like Apple TV could have higher margins and create ecosystem stickiness that is extremely valuable. It’s about the whole package. Apple never wants you to leave...this is another reason to stay.
People also said I didn't understand "business strategy" when I said Ping was a terrible idea. But, then again, people said the same things I'm saying now when the iPod launched, so who knows?
Personally, I see them as a company that can be more successful building unique hardware/software platforms than selling easily replicable services.
But I'm often wrong about such things, so when TV+ is top of the market in a decade, look me up and I'll buy you coke
PS. I'd also disagree with with your assertion that "device sales don't grow forever." If you are constantly innovating, they will. The only companies that have crumbled from being market leaders are those who stopped innovating and assumed certain device was already mature/had plateaued (Nokia is a great example).
Yeah, this is just like Ping and Apple fails so often.People also said I didn't understand "business strategy" when I said Ping was a terrible idea. But, then again, people said the same things I'm saying now when the iPod launched, so who knows?
Personally, I see them as a company that can be more successful building unique hardware/software platforms than selling easily replicable services.
But I'm often wrong about such things, so when TV+ is top of the market in a decade, look me up and I'll buy you coke
PS. I'd also disagree with with your assertion that "device sales don't grow forever." If you are constantly innovating, they will. The only companies that have crumbled from being market leaders are those who stopped innovating and assumed certain device was already mature/had plateaued (Nokia is a great example).
Apple is literally the best executing company on the planet.
Hahaha what makes you think I said they fail often -- quite the contrary, if you reread my reply.
But to each his own, man. I'm just here to talk about my favorite company; not pick fights. 🤙
Good contents + affordable price + wide multi language options = worldwide success.
If Apple is going to keep this formula over the next years, I have no doubts that they will become very successful in this business as well.
And that is exactly what’s already going on with Amazon Video.
If Apple is going to keep this formula over the next years, I have no doubts that they will become very successful in this business as well.
And that is exactly what’s already going on with Amazon Video.
Apple is still selling great products, or at least the customers of the 250 million units sold every year think so. And if you think their main product lines are languishing, you aren’t paying attention. Even smaller product lines like Macintosh are getting lots of attention, particularly in the last couple years.
What product lines do you perceive as languishing?
I think they're the best positioned company in the world to do well in wearables
I wasn't asserting Apple wasn't trying to expand its device sales; just disagreeing with another poster's assertion building a company based on selling devices isn't sustainable.
[automerge]1572009157[/automerge]
I disagree that the Mac is getting lots of attention. Most colleagues I know who use Mac as their work platform are complaining for the first time in over a decade that it doesn't suit their needs (I'm not talking about geeks like me who like to complain -- these are attorneys, doctors, etc. who are switching back to Windows after swearing it off 10+ years ago).
I also think there's a lot more they could be doing with iPhone, but know I'm in the minority on that one.
Part of me wonders just how much of what Apple isn't doing with smartphones is due to what they are doing with wearables.
For example, I suspect the chief reason why Apple evidently isn't doing a folding phone is because their answer to more screen estate is the Apple Watch (placing a screen on your wrist) and the rumoured AR glasses (which basically places a screen on your face, essentially one-upping even the largest smartphone display).
This is in contrast to other companies like Samsung who have practically zero wearables presence to speak of, and can only double down on smartphones to stay relevant, to the point where they apparently felt pressured to released the infamous Galaxy Fold in its current state.
It does make one wonder if by focusing so exclusively on the iPhone vs the rest of the competition, the critics are missing the bigger picture here. What was that saying? The Mantis Stalks the Cicada, Unaware of the Oriole Behind?
It’s a great point. I guess only time will tell if it’s the right decision to slow the pace of growth on one platform (iPhone) to focus on a larger ecosystem of gadgets.
Personally, I’d love to see more risk taking on the iPhone platform. The static grid of icons feels tiresome to me and outdated to have to dip into and out of 5 different apps just to check the same, basic things. I’d also love to see more maturity in messaging — unifying countless different apps into a more unified experience, perhaps. I think these improvements would only benefit their larger “halo effect” in other gadgets, including wearables.
I don’t think Apple is holding back because it’s a strategy so much as I just think they have no reason to innovate any more. They’re the most profitable phone builder and there’s no sense risking innovation when it’s your cash cow and no one else is pushing the envelope.
I read a lot of people here saying the smartphone is mature and there’s little room left for innovation. I totally disagree, but again I know I’m in the small minority here in thinking so.
It's not that hardware isn't sustainable, but it doesn't command the multiple of consistently recurring services revenue and doesn't "lock" users in to an ecosystem. You need both, but the services piece makes so much sense when your device count get to some critical mass, which Apple has done.I think they're the best positioned company in the world to do well in wearables
I wasn't asserting Apple wasn't trying to expand its device sales; just disagreeing with another poster's assertion building a company based on selling devices isn't sustainable.
[automerge]1572009157[/automerge]
I disagree that the Mac is getting lots of attention. Most colleagues I know who use Mac as their work platform are complaining for the first time in over a decade that it doesn't suit their needs (I'm not talking about geeks like me who like to complain -- these are attorneys, doctors, etc. who are switching back to Windows after swearing it off 10+ years ago).
I also think there's a lot more they could be doing with iPhone, but know I'm in the minority on that one.
BTW, Apple still sells about 300M units of hardware per year, so it's not like they gave up on it. They've just moved on to the next frontier to bolster the business and create more consistent revenue streams that the street will pay a premium. You flatten out the seasonal revenue peaks and valleys while expanding your higher margin services offering that keep users engaged and loyal to the platform.
Apple is brilliantly executing.
Given how many people use the iphone, I don’t think there is any easy way to reinvent the home screen without upsetting or alienating a significant number of them. For all its limitations, it works and is familiar to users and I guess that’s good enough for Apple right now.
I suppose it also depends on which definition of “innovation” you subscribe to. Samsung’s (be the first to do something for the sake of being first), or Apple’s (features that can legitimately improve people’s lives on a daily basis, even if they don’t seem like industry-defining breakthroughs or first-mover items).
The iphone 11 removed 3D Touch in order to fit in a larger battery. Face ID is improved. The camera is also dramatically improved, and it’s interesting that we are also seeing more articles about people using iPhones for photography and videos in place of more expensive, higher-end cameras. Then there’s also the U1 chip, which doesn’t seem to do anything yet, but you can be sure that Apple added it in for a very good reason. Not forgetting the A13 chip which brings better sustained graphics performance. Oh, and wifi 6 as well.
By themselves, these may seem like fairly minor, iterative improvements, but put them together, and you get a fairly solid list of upgrades that add up to a significant boost to the end user experience.
Meanwhile, are there really that many people out there genuinely disappointed that the iphone did not come with gimmicks like the ability to charge your smartwatch wirelessly from your phone, or support a non-existent 5G network?
Apple is still continuing to innovate, IMO, on its own terms.