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.
NBC Rhetoric vs. iTunes Increases
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Don't let that simple fact fool you. NBC/ABC/CBS/FOX/et al are making hordes of EXTRA money off of iTunes. It's revenue that was previously 0 or ad supported (really not that much - especially compared to $2 an episode). The big deal here is NBC is closing it off to all the international people who Apple has been working hard (or hardly working depending on who you ask
) to get TV content to the International Audience and now NBC says screw you. Not only do we not want your money we don't even want you watching our shows. Umm, what??And don't be fooled - AT&T is making a significant profit out of being cingular (pun intended
) provider of the iPhone in the US. If they were really loosing that much cash do you think tMobile and O2 would be signing up for the same type of deal?
Old media is pig cr@p.
Old media heads are pig vomit.
They're not even worth the sweat it would take to horsewhip them.
Just one more confirmation of why I despise the nets.
Old media heads are pig vomit.
They're not even worth the sweat it would take to horsewhip them.
Just one more confirmation of why I despise the nets.
NBC/Universal is working overtime to make themselves irrelevant, with or without iTunes.
They've already driven me away from three of the four NBC shows I used to always watch. They moved two Law & Order shows to incompatible time slots (one of them going against the Fox Sunday cartoons, and the other going against ER, on a different channel), and have simply ruined the third L&O show (using it as a soapbox for political rhetoric instead of telling a good story.) And their Sci-Fi Channel division is working overtime to cancel or destroy most of the other shows I like to watch.
Given the fact that their lousy programming decisions are rapidly driving me to watching little more than Fox cartoons and Discovery Channel documentaries, I really couldn't care less about their threats to Apple. If they want to go, fine. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
A Mac mini, if equipped with a third-party tuner/recorder package already has all the remaining components, thanks to FrontRow's ability to play any video clip on your hard drive.
On the music front, there are several DRM-free download solutions (including two that carry major-label material), plus CD ripping, plus audio-capture/radio tuner hardware (for those who want to record broadcasts), plus file sharing (illegal in most countries, but popular nonetheless.)
On the video front, there are multiple PVR solutions, and DVD ripping (illegal in many places, but still popular) in addition to iTunes. So Apple's hardly in control here either.
And, as with audio, there's nothing stopping third parties from selling video on their own. It will be iPod/Apple-TV compatible as long as it is DRM free. And even third-party DRM-wrapped content can be played on a Mac, if they are willing to ship a player (or at least a QuickTime plugin).
Ultimately, however, control will reside with the copyright holders. I predict that if the major studios don't get on the ball, they'll be marginalized just like the record labels are.
Which reminds me of something I heard a few months ago
This year, at Dragon*Con, Richard Hatch (of Battlestar Galactica fame) made a very interesting observation. It costs about $3M to produce an episode of Galactica (other Sci-Fi shows are similar. Shows without special effects tend to cost less.) A 4-episode DVD, therefore, costs about $12M to produce. If sold at $10 direct to customers (a bit more if sold retail, of course), it would require about 1.2-1.5 million purchases to break even. At its worst, Galactica's ratings have indicated 3-5 million viewers, and at its best, much more.
He mentioned this after observing a phenomenon WRT Galactica. The Nielsen ratings have declined over the first three seasons, but the fan response has been growing exponentially. This is because fans are buying the DVDs, they're making PVR recordings, and they're sharing their recordings with each other - none of which show up in the ratings. Even PVR recordings don't count unless the recording is watched within 24 hours of the broadcast, because the networks choose to look at overnight statistics and not long-term aggregates.
If a show like this is showing Nielsen ratings of 3-5M (which may not be enough to keep a show on the air), then it is likely that there are actually more like 7-10M actual viewers. More than enough to buy enough DVDs to keep a direct-sales show profitable. This is a golden opportunity for a production company to bypass the networks.
I'm not a businessman, but I think this model has merit, and I think we'll see a few production companies try it (at least as an experiment) in the near future. If the networks don't get on the ball by then, they'll be marginalized, just like the record labels are.
They've already driven me away from three of the four NBC shows I used to always watch. They moved two Law & Order shows to incompatible time slots (one of them going against the Fox Sunday cartoons, and the other going against ER, on a different channel), and have simply ruined the third L&O show (using it as a soapbox for political rhetoric instead of telling a good story.) And their Sci-Fi Channel division is working overtime to cancel or destroy most of the other shows I like to watch.
Given the fact that their lousy programming decisions are rapidly driving me to watching little more than Fox cartoons and Discovery Channel documentaries, I really couldn't care less about their threats to Apple. If they want to go, fine. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
That would be ideal. Right now, it would take only minor modifications (tuner hardware and some new software) to add PVR functionality to an Apple TV.
A Mac mini, if equipped with a third-party tuner/recorder package already has all the remaining components, thanks to FrontRow's ability to play any video clip on your hard drive.
Fortunately, consumers already have control. Apple simply needs to make it more obvious to those who haven't figured it out.
On the music front, there are several DRM-free download solutions (including two that carry major-label material), plus CD ripping, plus audio-capture/radio tuner hardware (for those who want to record broadcasts), plus file sharing (illegal in most countries, but popular nonetheless.)
On the video front, there are multiple PVR solutions, and DVD ripping (illegal in many places, but still popular) in addition to iTunes. So Apple's hardly in control here either.
And, as with audio, there's nothing stopping third parties from selling video on their own. It will be iPod/Apple-TV compatible as long as it is DRM free. And even third-party DRM-wrapped content can be played on a Mac, if they are willing to ship a player (or at least a QuickTime plugin).
Ultimately, however, control will reside with the copyright holders. I predict that if the major studios don't get on the ball, they'll be marginalized just like the record labels are.
Which reminds me of something I heard a few months ago
This year, at Dragon*Con, Richard Hatch (of Battlestar Galactica fame) made a very interesting observation. It costs about $3M to produce an episode of Galactica (other Sci-Fi shows are similar. Shows without special effects tend to cost less.) A 4-episode DVD, therefore, costs about $12M to produce. If sold at $10 direct to customers (a bit more if sold retail, of course), it would require about 1.2-1.5 million purchases to break even. At its worst, Galactica's ratings have indicated 3-5 million viewers, and at its best, much more.
He mentioned this after observing a phenomenon WRT Galactica. The Nielsen ratings have declined over the first three seasons, but the fan response has been growing exponentially. This is because fans are buying the DVDs, they're making PVR recordings, and they're sharing their recordings with each other - none of which show up in the ratings. Even PVR recordings don't count unless the recording is watched within 24 hours of the broadcast, because the networks choose to look at overnight statistics and not long-term aggregates.
If a show like this is showing Nielsen ratings of 3-5M (which may not be enough to keep a show on the air), then it is likely that there are actually more like 7-10M actual viewers. More than enough to buy enough DVDs to keep a direct-sales show profitable. This is a golden opportunity for a production company to bypass the networks.
I'm not a businessman, but I think this model has merit, and I think we'll see a few production companies try it (at least as an experiment) in the near future. If the networks don't get on the ball by then, they'll be marginalized, just like the record labels are.
Ok my take on this (I'm british so this might be a bit off)
NBC produce the series which they flog on free tv and make all their money by adverts and by selling dvds or to other countries for their viewing - cost of production remains constant whether theres an online store or not.
NBC sends same film/series (most likely already in a digital format) to apple who then convert the film to desired format for itunes.
NBC make an additional $15million for doing absolutely nothing apart from sending a file to apple, apple make small profit after overheads.
NBC pull out of itunes due to pricing issues and decide on going free with adverts (probably the same as shown on live tv) or without - has to do own processing to flash format for web only viewing.
So in my view NBC are idiots, there is no reason they couldn't combine HULU with itunes, there are a lot of itunes/ipod users, alot of which are getting savy with torrents etc. And they made $15million (I suspect it was higher) which they would not have made without itunes.
People who are paying for content from itunes are not likely to do in browser viewing and the ones who don't pay aren't bothered either way.
My take on NBC is they want more money, fair enough but I wouldn't pay more than the current asking price for a tv series which is in a) a low resolution, b) not really suitable for anything other than ipod/itv viewing c) free if you have a recorder in a media pc and d) has no physical medium (ie no dvd).
If I want something to keep, I'll wait for the cheap priced dvd to come out, spend a bit of my time ripping the file and then have a movie and something to physically hold onto.
NBC produce the series which they flog on free tv and make all their money by adverts and by selling dvds or to other countries for their viewing - cost of production remains constant whether theres an online store or not.
NBC sends same film/series (most likely already in a digital format) to apple who then convert the film to desired format for itunes.
NBC make an additional $15million for doing absolutely nothing apart from sending a file to apple, apple make small profit after overheads.
NBC pull out of itunes due to pricing issues and decide on going free with adverts (probably the same as shown on live tv) or without - has to do own processing to flash format for web only viewing.
So in my view NBC are idiots, there is no reason they couldn't combine HULU with itunes, there are a lot of itunes/ipod users, alot of which are getting savy with torrents etc. And they made $15million (I suspect it was higher) which they would not have made without itunes.
People who are paying for content from itunes are not likely to do in browser viewing and the ones who don't pay aren't bothered either way.
My take on NBC is they want more money, fair enough but I wouldn't pay more than the current asking price for a tv series which is in a) a low resolution, b) not really suitable for anything other than ipod/itv viewing c) free if you have a recorder in a media pc and d) has no physical medium (ie no dvd).
If I want something to keep, I'll wait for the cheap priced dvd to come out, spend a bit of my time ripping the file and then have a movie and something to physically hold onto.
Why stop at iPods?
On the same note, I think that TV manufacturers should begin to share their profits with NBC as well. I sure wouldn't buy a TV if it couldn't pick up NBC.
On the same note, I think that TV manufacturers should begin to share their profits with NBC as well. I sure wouldn't buy a TV if it couldn't pick up NBC.
I think you answered your own question by saying the web people and downloading people aren't the same.
I'd probably say that the majority of those that want to be able to put it on portable devices either use torrents or their tivo to save their files and then put it on anything they want to.
No it wasn't FREE REVENUE!!!! They had to pay Apple. What part of overhead comes out free? And if they weren't making enough money off of advertising then how do they even put shows on the air? How does google make all of its money? Hmmm.... go to hulu.com, get plastered with ads that are paying NBC to be on the website and that gets rid of the overhead to Apple, and probably a lot more money - once again considering google as the ideal here.
Like I said before, its not the best solution for NBC, but I think they've realized that torrents are huge, tivo/dvrs are more and more common, so sooner or later less and less people are going to pay 1.99 for something that is free on TV. I personally think its going to hurt Apple, however minimal, more than its going to hurt NBC.
I think it is a 2 way street. Apple refused to give any control over the pricing. NBC has deside in the long run they would rather not let apple get that much power. They want some of the control. Plus it all supply and demand. They more than likely believe that some of the shows where rightfully so worth more than 1.99 other might be worth a little less but apple refuses to let them have any control over the pricing.
People complain about NBC not sharing control but apple is a control freak and one of the worse in that matter. They refused to let any one else really have much control over anything to do with there products.
People complain about NBC not sharing control but apple is a control freak and one of the worse in that matter. They refused to let any one else really have much control over anything to do with there products.
To take this another perspective about Apple paying money to music labels that they receive from iPod revenue...
So, next time you go out and buy a fridge, are you going to pay money to the different companies that might stock your fridge with food? No.
Stupid NBC, like the stupid Hulu will do anything, please
But hey, only a matter of time until re can put those videos onto any iPod.
So, next time you go out and buy a fridge, are you going to pay money to the different companies that might stock your fridge with food? No.
Stupid NBC, like the stupid Hulu will do anything, please
But hey, only a matter of time until re can put those videos onto any iPod.
Ah, this is proof that content providers always play the blame game. Nothing is ever their own fault. That's how it's always been and how it always will be. By the time they catch up with the digital age of now, we'll be in the digital age of tomorrow and they'll still be out of touch.
Wow, NBC are even more stupid than I thought.
Here's the fundamental problem for NBC that they just don't seem to get; my entertainment habits aren't limited by budget, they're limited by time. Like everyone else, I'm busy to begin with and in this modern internet world, there are more opportunities for free entertainment than I will ever be able to explore. The one thing I am not is bored. The only way that commercial distribution of entertainment (online TV show re-runs especially) will ever be able to compete with the flood of free entertainment is to be so cheap that I don't care about the money.
NBC is acting like the world is the same as it was when I was a kid; the largest cities had at most five or six TV channels (which went off the air overnight and included black & white shows), no cable TV, no VCR's, no cassette tape recorders, & certainly no internet. TV business models from those days are less than irrelevant in today's world.
Jobs was right to hold his ground. There is no way I will ever buy TV shows for $2.99 an episode. Even $1.99 is too much. I bought a couple on a lark when iTunes first got TV shows just to try it out, but I only watched them once and essentially it was just wasted money.
If they want to try making money from online distribution, they need to REDUCE the price of TV shows. At most, they should be $0.99 an episode and I might think about it. Realistically, if they really want me to buy a lot of shows, they are going to have to sell them for no more than $0.50. Given that the cost of reproduction and distribution is essentially zero, if they can't make a profit at 50 cents, then they are stupid and need to go out of business to make way for somebody who knows what they are doing.
As for NBC getting a cut of ipod sales, what kind of drugs did Zucker have to get stoned on to think that one up?! That makes as much sense as demanding a cut from the TV manufacturers, or say the oil companies demanding a cut from the car companies.
As for Zucker's thoughts on the music business; cry me a river. So what. Again, Apple has made reproduction and distribution costs negligible and even lets the record companies keep the vast majority of income (often said to be $0.70 per track sold). If they can't make a profit at those prices, they are just as stupid and just as deserving of failure as NBC.
I had gotten so frustrated with the worthless content and absurd prices and bundling practices of the music industry that I had essentially quit buying music at all for many years. The only reason I returned to buying music was the iTunes store and it is the only place I shop for music. Any price increase or any decrease in buying options at iTunes will guaranteed stop my music buying cold once again. While I do buy some stuff at $0.99, if the music companies had even half a brain, they'd cut the price to $0.50 and I'd buy far more than twice as much.
While they are at it, movie prices need to come down to $5 or less if they want me to buy.
Somebody needs make it clear to the media companies that their days of insane profits are over. They can make money and can compete in the world of vast and pervasive free entertainment and super simple piracy, but they are going to have to live with profit margins more in line with other industries. If the media moguls can't learn to live on lower margins, they are going to die, simple as that. Maybe Steve Jobs is the guy to tell them.
It was rumored some time ago that Apple iced its DVR project to appease NBC specifically in order to get their cooperation with the iTunes store. If Zucker is going to at like a crying baby because the market will no longer respond to his every greedy whim, then time for Apple to add DVR functionality to their lineup and give everyone the ability to watch NBC's content whenever & wherever they want without sending any money to NBC. I'll hold out a little while longer for that, but if it doesn't happen soon, it's Elgato for me. No matter what though, until NBC drops their prices to something I'm willing to pay, I'm not going to do business with them and for all I care they can go bankrupt. If they do, there's still way more entertainment out there than I can ever take in.
Here's the fundamental problem for NBC that they just don't seem to get; my entertainment habits aren't limited by budget, they're limited by time. Like everyone else, I'm busy to begin with and in this modern internet world, there are more opportunities for free entertainment than I will ever be able to explore. The one thing I am not is bored. The only way that commercial distribution of entertainment (online TV show re-runs especially) will ever be able to compete with the flood of free entertainment is to be so cheap that I don't care about the money.
NBC is acting like the world is the same as it was when I was a kid; the largest cities had at most five or six TV channels (which went off the air overnight and included black & white shows), no cable TV, no VCR's, no cassette tape recorders, & certainly no internet. TV business models from those days are less than irrelevant in today's world.
Jobs was right to hold his ground. There is no way I will ever buy TV shows for $2.99 an episode. Even $1.99 is too much. I bought a couple on a lark when iTunes first got TV shows just to try it out, but I only watched them once and essentially it was just wasted money.
If they want to try making money from online distribution, they need to REDUCE the price of TV shows. At most, they should be $0.99 an episode and I might think about it. Realistically, if they really want me to buy a lot of shows, they are going to have to sell them for no more than $0.50. Given that the cost of reproduction and distribution is essentially zero, if they can't make a profit at 50 cents, then they are stupid and need to go out of business to make way for somebody who knows what they are doing.
As for NBC getting a cut of ipod sales, what kind of drugs did Zucker have to get stoned on to think that one up?! That makes as much sense as demanding a cut from the TV manufacturers, or say the oil companies demanding a cut from the car companies.
As for Zucker's thoughts on the music business; cry me a river. So what. Again, Apple has made reproduction and distribution costs negligible and even lets the record companies keep the vast majority of income (often said to be $0.70 per track sold). If they can't make a profit at those prices, they are just as stupid and just as deserving of failure as NBC.
I had gotten so frustrated with the worthless content and absurd prices and bundling practices of the music industry that I had essentially quit buying music at all for many years. The only reason I returned to buying music was the iTunes store and it is the only place I shop for music. Any price increase or any decrease in buying options at iTunes will guaranteed stop my music buying cold once again. While I do buy some stuff at $0.99, if the music companies had even half a brain, they'd cut the price to $0.50 and I'd buy far more than twice as much.
While they are at it, movie prices need to come down to $5 or less if they want me to buy.
Somebody needs make it clear to the media companies that their days of insane profits are over. They can make money and can compete in the world of vast and pervasive free entertainment and super simple piracy, but they are going to have to live with profit margins more in line with other industries. If the media moguls can't learn to live on lower margins, they are going to die, simple as that. Maybe Steve Jobs is the guy to tell them.
It was rumored some time ago that Apple iced its DVR project to appease NBC specifically in order to get their cooperation with the iTunes store. If Zucker is going to at like a crying baby because the market will no longer respond to his every greedy whim, then time for Apple to add DVR functionality to their lineup and give everyone the ability to watch NBC's content whenever & wherever they want without sending any money to NBC. I'll hold out a little while longer for that, but if it doesn't happen soon, it's Elgato for me. No matter what though, until NBC drops their prices to something I'm willing to pay, I'm not going to do business with them and for all I care they can go bankrupt. If they do, there's still way more entertainment out there than I can ever take in.
Apple also needs to realize that as good as its products are, content really does make them shine. My
If Apple integrated a DVR into iLife / iTunes/ AppleTV, you'd be able to watch it just fine regardless of where NBC wants to sell its re-runs and you wouldn't even have to pay NBC...
(Of course, you can do that already with Elgato.)
If Apple really wants to do it right, they'll make it super simple to delete the commercials and move & reproduce the recording anywhere you like. Then Zucker will really have something cry about.
Apple has the upper hand here and they should stick to NBC had enough that Jobs can just buy up the remnants of NBC for pennies on the dollar and run it himself.
sure jeff, but . . .
Would be great if the parties could work this out, but Zucker sounds like the latest in an ever-lengthening line of media execs who can't see beyond they're own greed and pride.
I'm interested to see how this all shakes out. I think Zucker may overestimate the importance of NBC content at the iTMS, especially with Apple's special relationship with the Disney family. NBC would be missed, but may feel they're missing something on hulu.
Would be great if the parties could work this out, but Zucker sounds like the latest in an ever-lengthening line of media execs who can't see beyond they're own greed and pride.
I'm interested to see how this all shakes out. I think Zucker may overestimate the importance of NBC content at the iTMS, especially with Apple's special relationship with the Disney family. NBC would be missed, but may feel they're missing something on hulu.
Ok my take on this (I'm british so this might be a bit off)
NBC produce the series which they flog on free tv and make all their money by adverts and by selling dvds or to other countries for their viewing - cost of production remains constant whether theres an online store or not.
NBC sends same film/series (most likely already in a digital format) to apple who then convert the film to desired format for itunes.
NBC make an additional $15million for doing absolutely nothing apart from sending a file to apple, apple make small profit after overheads.
NBC pull out of itunes due to pricing issues and decide on going free with adverts (probably the same as shown on live tv) or without - has to do own processing to flash format for web only viewing.
So in my view NBC are idiots, there is no reason they couldn't combine HULU with itunes, there are a lot of itunes/ipod users, alot of which are getting savy with torrents etc. And they made $15million (I suspect it was higher) which they would not have made without itunes.
People who are paying for content from itunes are not likely to do in browser viewing and the ones who don't pay aren't bothered either way.
My take on NBC is they want more money, fair enough but I wouldn't pay more than the current asking price for a tv series which is in a) a low resolution, b) not really suitable for anything other than ipod/itv viewing c) free if you have a recorder in a media pc and d) has no physical medium (ie no dvd).
If I want something to keep, I'll wait for the cheap priced dvd to come out, spend a bit of my time ripping the file and then have a movie and something to physically hold onto.
a lot of sense here, a lot of sense. please share with nbc.
Yeah, the whole iPhone situation is a perfect example of Apple's greed, I would say. Which is a trait of all companies. It is a tough market, companies have to survive and strive to expand, think of how to maximize profit, at almost all costs...
Regarding iTunes, I do understand the record labels. I think I have no problem paying different price for different songs/albums/videos, as long as they stay reasonable. That is pretty natural...
Cry Babies...
First, they are just upset because the consumers have finally broken the stranglehold the record industry had on the entertainment business. These fools have been forcing us to listen to garbage for years, and now with the internet, the best music can find its way to consumers. As a matter of fact, digital technology has nearly destroyed the greedy scam studios have been profiting from for decades. Indie producers can sell their music on iTunes, and even get a majority of the .99 cent cost back. The studios have never paid a writer/producer/performer that high of a return. As for NBC expecting part of the revenues of the iPod, they are getting revenues. They are selling more music. This is the same relationship that Apple has with AT&T. They develop technology that sells more music (or cell contracts) and Apple gets some of the revenue. What did NBC have to do with developing the iPod? Music has been around a lot longer than NBC. They didn't invent it. They do not even produce most of their shows. They buy them from production companies and the creative writers and producers that think them up. The Office, like many of the best shows, came from Public supported BBC producers and writers. NBC couldn't "create a hit if their lives depended on it.
First, they are just upset because the consumers have finally broken the stranglehold the record industry had on the entertainment business. These fools have been forcing us to listen to garbage for years, and now with the internet, the best music can find its way to consumers. As a matter of fact, digital technology has nearly destroyed the greedy scam studios have been profiting from for decades. Indie producers can sell their music on iTunes, and even get a majority of the .99 cent cost back. The studios have never paid a writer/producer/performer that high of a return. As for NBC expecting part of the revenues of the iPod, they are getting revenues. They are selling more music. This is the same relationship that Apple has with AT&T. They develop technology that sells more music (or cell contracts) and Apple gets some of the revenue. What did NBC have to do with developing the iPod? Music has been around a lot longer than NBC. They didn't invent it. They do not even produce most of their shows. They buy them from production companies and the creative writers and producers that think them up. The Office, like many of the best shows, came from Public supported BBC producers and writers. NBC couldn't "create a hit if their lives depended on it.
Ah ah i agree! But probably it is not an idiot after all, he is only trying to paint Apple bad, lot of companies and even a lot of users are doing it. And it is an important weapon, sadly.
Understanding English
Nobody claimed Amazon was making mp3 players just selling them. To get the difference please refer to a dictionary.
Amazon currently lists about 1900 items in their "mp3 players" category.
Nobody claimed Amazon was making mp3 players just selling them. To get the difference please refer to a dictionary.
Amazon currently lists about 1900 items in their "mp3 players" category.