Will AppleTV+ turn into a full service TV provider?

[jkmoses]

I'm anxiously awaiting the news that Apple has decided to become a TV streaming service option. I don't think their current AppleTV+ is the end game. I think the big move for them was "Channels" so they get content providers comfortable with letting Apple consume their content in the tvOS interface. The ideal scenario would be someone being able to put together their own "bundle" of channels for a certain price. I would pay $50/month for 10 channels that I would actually watch. I would like the live tv and on-demand for each of those 10 channels. I don't need 120 channels just to watch a small handful of them. I actually love the AppleTV interface more and more and watch a lot of my on-demand content in there now. However, I'm paying Xfinity $120/month for service, equipment, etc. Their provider login is a little wonky as well. I feel like I have to keep signing in over and over. What does everyone else think Apple's plan are on in the TV content space?

 

[mallbritton]

For $50 a month I would expect at least 25 channels selected by me.

 

[BODYBUILDERPAUL]

I don't think so. Those 'old skool' TV channels and packages are very last century outside of the USA.
Apple have always thought 5 years ahead in everything that they do, doing TV channels would be the equivalent of putting a BluRay drive in the new MacBook Pro. soooooooo last century!

If anything, ATV+ will simply evolve creating its own style, just like Apple does and i'm convinced that it remain very elegant, classy and international with a slight liberal feel to it. It will be an educated choice. It'll have substance and meaning to it unlike the majority of TV 'channels' out there.

Also, outside of the USA, there are very few people in 2019 who are willing to pay 50 dollars a month to watch the TV on top of their 50 a month for fibre broadband and 50-80 a month for their iPhone tariff!

I'm sure that in a few years time, it will become much sought after in terms of its original programming.

I wish them the very best with it.

 

[TheIntruder]

It would seem to be a natural progression, but the last time Apple tried to cut deals to offer a skinny bundle, it was laughed out of Hollywood.

Much of the industry believes the future of the streaming business is in offering originally curated and self-produced content.

Obtaining licensees to replay someone else's stuff, especially when those licenses are subject to ever-increasing fees, and sudden revocation, would seem to be a fool's errand.

Netflix had to do that to get itself established, as did Amazon, before both realized that they had to invest money to create their own content and stop having their chains jerked around by Hollywood. The former has gone into serious hock to do so.

Apple has adopted that strategy from the start with ATV+, and the established content cartel members have either been teamed up with distributors, or are setting up their own channels to go straight to consumers.

It will be interesting to see how the traditional ad-supported broadcast TV business evolves. Sports and news are really the only reasons why many viewers still tune in, while others not raised with that model see it as foreign, so it's easy to see it shrinking in the future.

For them, live TV is about as quaint as buying CDs instead of streaming their music.

 

[Tech198]

$50 sounds ok,, but that would be able o price of a cable subscription..

The only difference would be you don't get the content... And just because Apple may do it's offerings won't change that fact in don't believe.

What could Apple give cable companies cannot give ? You can tell how restricted Apple can get content, as providers don't wanna go to streaming... with all exception of HBO offering $15 a web service, it everyone decided to look at HBO, they WOULD be in the same boat by now. That was in 2015 there about

in 2019, noting really has changed much... Companies are *still* resisting. And despite Apple closing the loop, and so is Netflx, none of it is long term... Content keep coming down as well.

The only thing that will be proven, if Apple can provide a deal and content *stays up regardless*

So far, no service can match that..

The closest would be purchased content, and the rental modem of Apple.. not a subscription model,, However if it *was* a subscription price, it would not be cheap i.e under $25 = no way.

And, the content would have be what everyone likes, which is impossible... Everyone has different tastes. and since no one will put up everything for cheap, that basically is the 'headwind."

If you look at Hulu TV servce where you have DVR for around $45 a month with ads, and more without ads, thats probably the starting point. (but providing the content stays there)

Even Apple purchases they cannot do that..

 

[satcomer]

To me to save money I set a limit of 3 servers that have the best back shows p, one for originals and one for free stations and college hockey! With my attennas with the Mail broadcast stations that is enough to satisfy me!

 

[Packers1958]

I doubt it. PS Vue is shutting down in January. I'm sure more will follow.