So what your saying is if all those companies won't give the videos the way Apple wants them, Apple should abandon the idea? Say Apple says "We'll need these video's in XXX format for this to work", Fox-"No, if the users want it in XXX format they can pay more or go buy the dvd" we should expect Apple to say "well then we won't do this and we're gong to abandon the idea"
Not precisely, but close, yes.
Apple has a realm of possible scenarios to take to market which it believes will benefit them. Fox has a realm of acceptable scenarios which it believes will benefit them. Aside from scenarios which heavily favor one of these two over the other (such as, Apple takes a huge loss per rental, or Fox takes no profit per rental), where they do not overlap either Apple is wrong, or Fox is wrong. Because, if a scenario is "fair" (benefiting both parties roughly equally) and does not benefit one party, then it does not benefit the other party either. QED.
Now, if Apple comes to the table and after fleshing everything out, the best they can do is an offer from Fox which they do not believe will substantially benefit them, then either they are wrong to believe that, or Fox is wrong to believe that this will be a profitable approach. If Apple sticks to its guns, then Fox goes to other companies with similar deals. If Apple was right, either no one takes the deal, or someone takes the deal and both that company and Fox fail in their venture.
This gets complicated when larger strategies come into play, which I suspect is likely the case here (Apple's negotiators are far too smart to take a deal which they believe is not in their best interest). Still, yes, from a consumer's perspective, I'd much rather they walk away from the table, let the unrealistic plan fail, and come back to the table a year later to get a much better deal.
I for one would rather suck it up with 'reasonable' quality at first until the idea catches on. No need to invest to much in something that may or may not take off or be overrun by another service.
I'm not sure what you're getting at here, but I see no indication that Apple will be able to come back around a year or two later and renegotiate. If anything, renegotiations will tend to favor the studios, not Apple.
It's all about the all mighty dollar and Apple has and is investing some but the real people to stand to loose or gain are the movie companies that count on certain sales.
Hey I'm just being objective here and trying to see what could be a potential reason rather than be a h8r and doing the "It's Apple's fault" thing. It may or may not be them. At least it's happening and again, no one is forcing anyones arm to partake in the service.
First, I wouldn't say "it's Apple's fault". However, Apple isn't acting in the best interests of the consumer when they roll over for the studios' unrealistic demands. There is likely a larger issue at play behind the scenes, and it isn't altogether assured that
that is in the consumer's interest either.
Second, "at least it's happening". Was there an unfillable void in your soul when Apple wasn't schlocking the same warez as Amazon and Netflix? I don't see any reason to rejoice over Yet Another Distributor vending movies with no better terms, no better selection, no better price.
Finally, obviously, no one is forcing any of us to partake in the service. I don't think anyone has claimed that here at all. We are, however, claiming that this stinks of a failure of a venture for Apple. We are perfectly within our rights to claim that. And, yes, we claim that precisely
because no one is forcing us to use this service. There is no compelling reason for us to use it. That's
why it's likely to fail!
TV.
