Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Warner Bros. Opted Out of iTunes TV Show Rentals Over Pricing, Impact on Full-Season Sales

What a MORON!

Isn't 2.99 for the purhcase and .99, well... WB...

IT'S A RENTAL! Idiots...

I'm not purchasing the full season? And you just lost yourself multiple .99 cent rentals! Good job. Give yourself a raise, Einstein! :rolleyes:
 
alt said:
I wouldn't pay a dime for anything unless its something I get to keep. Who actually pays for episodes? Just seems ridiculous. There are so many ways to watch episodes for free these days......not even including torrenting.
Click to expand...
I don't like paying for things I don't get to keep either. I guess some average consumers aren't aware of legal streaming sites such as Hulu, and even less about torrents.
 
Rot'nApple said:
What a MORON!

Isn't 2.99 for the purhcase and .99, well... WB...

IT'S A RENTAL! Idiots...

I'm not purchasing the full season? And you just lost yourself multiple .99 cent rentals! Good job. Give yourself a raise, Einstein! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Oh dear... An enraged "birther". LMAO
 
Yvan256 said:
If the networks thinks that 99 cents rentals will cut into sales of 2.99$ shows, they're over-evaluating their importance.
Click to expand...

Ding Ding Ding

Just like the dinosaurs they are. Very reminiscent of the recording industry and now the mobile telephone industry as well.

The problem they don't seem to understand is that they are competing with FREE -- over the air, and torrents. So long as they refuse to play ball--with the arcane restrictions and obnoxious pricing models--they'll suffer a painful demise. You'd think they would learn from the recording industry...
 
bwillwall said:
I would never pay to rent anything thats on tv. Maybe apple will change this, im not sure i want to pay just so I can watch something one time. I mean i could already record it on my dvr. I dont think apple has found what ppl want. I want to pay to keep something forever. Maybe rent movies too but i can do that for way cheaper with netflix and movie stores. I dont like the no storage thing. Yes you can stream, but that sounds as annoying as syncing or more. the internet isnt stable enough for all this info to only be stored by it.
Click to expand...

You are missing the point of renting shows via Apple TV. This option will enable millions to drop cable TV altogether.
 
I wish Warner Bros. would allow me the privilege of buying a season pass for "The Big Bang Theory" in HD from iTunes. To "save their syndication value", they've pulled the show from the store since the beginning of season two.
 
maflynn said:
Read my post again. The upgrade to DVR is only 99cents. Yes, I'm paying around 50 bucks a month for cable, but I'd be paying for that anyways even if I had apple-tv. So really I'm getting all the functionality of apple-tv for a 12 dollars a year and I can record/save as many tv shows as I want without an added expense.
Click to expand...

If all the shows you can watch on TV are available via Apple TV rentals, and you still want to keep your cable subscription, then Apple TV is not for you.
 
Žalgiris said:
Surprise, surprise ... and everyone was pointing fingers at Apple. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

As usual. Sometimes rightly so, but often not in these "content wars".

Apple makes a lot of $ off content rentals/sales. Remember the 30% cut. It is always in their best interest to offer as much content as possible.

You can think the dinosaurs.
 
sirozha said:
If all the shows you can watch on TV are available via Apple TV rentals, and you still want to keep your cable subscription, then Apple TV is not for you.
Click to expand...

And if all of the tv shows you want are not available for rental then the apple-tv is not for you or if you want to rent more then 2+ tv shows a night, because the cost will then exceed the cost of cable.
 
macrazee said:
As usual. Sometimes rightly so, but often not in these "content wars".

Apple makes a lot of $ off content rentals/sales. Remember the 30% cut. It is always in their best interest to offer as much content as possible.

You can think the dinosaurs.
Click to expand...

Do you have a link that Apple gets 30% of iTunes Music Store sales? I know that's the case with apps, but don't think that's true for other stuff.
 
maflynn said:
Sure, for people who don't watch much tv, that makes sense but
Renting just 2 tv shows a night would equal the cost of cable and again you only get two networks to select from. Add in more shows per night and you could easily surpass the cost of cable.

My question is what demographic is the apple-tv aimed at? Is it the person who doesn't watch much tv or someone who watches it a lot.
Click to expand...

It's for people who want to do something with their lives and not to watch hundreds of hours of mindless TV every month. Just imagine how many books you could read or how many languages you could learn in your lifetime if you were not watching all this crap on your cable every night. Apple TV encourages you to watch ONLY the stuff that is good - which is very rare - and then turn your TV off and go read a book - perhaps on your iPad.
 
sirozha said:
It's for people who want to do something with their lives and not to watch hundreds of hours of mindless TV every month. Just imagine how many books you could read or how many languages you can learn in your lifetime if you were not watching all this crap on your cable every night. Apple TV encourages you to watch ONLY the stuff that is good - which is very rare - and then turn your TV off and go read a book - perhaps on your iPad.
Click to expand...

Bingo.
 
maflynn said:
And if all of the tv shows you want are not available for rental then the apple-tv is not for you or if you want to rent more then 2+ tv shows a night, because the cost will then exceed the cost of cable.
Click to expand...

First off, you should understand that not every network will come on board right away. Give it some time - perhaps two or three seasons - and I am sure most networks will accept the rental paradigm.

Secondly, if you want to watch more than 2 shows per night, do not buy an Apple TV.

Thirdly, perhaps you should pose this philosophical question to yourself, What are you doing with your life if you want to watch more than 2 shows per night every night that you are alive? Is this a life well lived?
 
WB has a history of jumping on a sinking ship. They're the ones that signed onto give Blockbuster the first run DVDs, instead of giving them to Netflix. Blockbuster will die and Netflix will be laughing. WB is letting greed keep them away from being innovative.

Barry! People will still buy the DVD box sets if they like the show. For myself, I would rent shows to catch up on stuff I missed. If they don't let me do it for 99 cents, I'll just miss the show and you'll have no chance of getting my money.
 
sirozha said:
First off, you should understand that not every network will come on board right away. Give it some time - perhaps two or three seasons - and I am sure most networks will accept the rental paradigm.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the other networks are taking the same approach that Apple is taking towards Blu-ray? ;)
 
It's all about content. As someone who who does not watch much TV and does not have cable, I would gladly spend $99 for a device that I could use to rent any show ala carte commercial free for $.99.
The problem is that it's not worth it until more content is available.
 
What are these execs smoking?

Honestly I dont think I'd pay even .99 to watch a network TV show, let alone 2.99.

Make them free like On-Deamand services and place ads in them. I'll watch ads but don't see myself ever paying to watch normally free tv. MAYBE on a rare occasion for .99, but 2.99 no way.
 
maflynn said:
Read my post again. The upgrade to DVR is only 99cents. Yes, I'm paying around 50 bucks a month for cable, but I'd be paying for that anyways even if I had apple-tv. So really I'm getting all the functionality of apple-tv for a 12 dollars a year and I can record/save as many tv shows as I want without an added expense.
Click to expand...

You are not the target market for this product. This is intended for people that don't have cable TV or want to drop cable TV. I don't have cable, but I have this amazing thing called an antenna and a HDHomeRun, a Mac and eyeTV 3.0 software. I get all my network programs in HD and I can record and use them the way I want to. So, neither Apple nor the cable company are my customers. However, for streaming my own media, I might end up getting the new AppleTV. I have the old one and use it for whole home audio through AirTunes.
 
OllyW said:
Perhaps the other networks are taking the same approach that Apple is taking towards Blu-ray? ;)
Click to expand...

Apple is looking beyond Blue-ray. Cloud computing is the way of the future. It's like what happened in many developing countries. They went from not having regular telephones to everyone having a cell phone in a matter of a decade. They still don't have wireline telephones, and they do not need them anymore. A similar thing happened with the banking system in those countries. They went from cash-only to electronic payments completely bypassing bank checks (cheques). Sometimes not jumping on every fad out there may be a better strategy.

If I could stream any movie or TV show that I want to watch from the cloud directly to my TV (without having a computer in the mix), I have no need to purchase DVDs or Blue-ray discs. Neither do I have any reason to drive to the nearest Blockbuster or Red Box to rent a DVD or a Blue-ray disc. It's a much "greener" way to consume video content.

Also, factor in your time and money spent on the fuel when you drive to rent a movie vs renting directly from your TV or from an Apple TV. Even if you can rent a movie from a Red Box for $1/day, and the same movie is available on iTunes for $3 to rent, I would still prefer iTunes. I make much more than $4/hour, so a 30-minute two-way trip to a Red Box to rent a movie for $1 will not save me any money.
 
maflynn said:
Ok let me rephrase that. My DVR is nearly free (dollar a month more then a non-dvr reciever) and offers more utility then spending a buck a show and not being able to keep it.

Again, why spend a hundred dollars for a device and then 99 cents for a tv-show that I already get. The omission of of all the networks except ABC/FOX only amplifies apple's failure to turn the apple-tv into a winning device.
Click to expand...

I think apples idea is that if all networks are on board with 99 cent rentals, then people will quit paying for cable television and start using this model. It is much cheaper to only pay for the shows you want to watch, than to pay for hundreds of channels with shows no one watches. It won't work unless everyone's on board, but it is really only a matter of time.
 
supmango said:
I think apples idea is that if all networks are on board with 99 cent rentals, then people will quit paying for cable television and start using this model. It is much cheaper to only pay for the shows you want to watch, than to pay for hundreds of channels with shows no one watches. It won't work unless everyone's on board, but it is really only a matter of time.
Click to expand...

Hope Discovery is on board. Dirty Jobs :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back