Apple TV subscription service in 2010, CBS, Disney on board?

News

Apple TV subscription service in 2010, CBS, Disney on board?

Both CBS and Disney are considering signing on for Apple’s TV subscription service, according to a new report. Citing people familiar with the matter, the Wall Street Journal reports that Apple is currently making a push to complete licensing deals and would like to introduce the service in 2010, although it is unclear whether any networks have signed on yet. The report goes on to state that the service is part of a larger strategy to overhaul the iTunes Store, offering consumers more ways to access and manage their media. This plan ties in with Apple’s plan to launch a multimedia tablet next year; the report cites people briefed by Apple that the company plans to launch it by the end of March.

Apple is having trouble reaching a substantial number of networks for the service, however, as companies such as News Corp., Viacom, Turner Broadcasting, and Discovery Communications appear to be hesitant to join up. Although Apple is said to be offering between $2 and $4 a month, per subscriber, to broadcast networks, and $1 to $2 a month to basic cable networks—much greater reimbursement, in some cases, than what the companies receive from traditional distributors—some executives are worried that the service could undermine the successful model of selling bundles of cable networks to distributors, while others are concerned that the service wouldn’t include advertising. “You don’t want to shoot a hole in the bucket to create another revenue stream,” one media executive said. Apple’s plan may be changing as it continues to try and sign on networks, say people familiar with the matter; the initial proposal had the company selling access to ad-free shows from a group of top cable and broadcast networks for $30 per month.

« Zagg intros ZAGGsparq mobile battery

iPod touch users lag on iPhone OS 3.0 adoption »

Comments

1

I truly hope something like this will be released. I’m sick of cable bundles which include 100s of channels I’ll never watch. The old views of cable/broadcast companies will be their downfall. It’s happened before and if they are not ready for the change, so be it. There has always been plenty of warning.

Posted by Adam on December 22, 2009 at 6:43 AM (PST)

2

YES….PLEASE! WE HATE CABLE BILLS (give us a reduced price for some commercials i.e. Hulu, and pay a premium for no solicitation).

Posted by chenz on December 22, 2009 at 8:49 AM (PST)

3

I’ve seen a lot of people make the comment about not wanting to pay bundles for hundreds of channels they never watch but unless you’re literally only watching a few channels, that doesn’t make sense. Paying a la carte at $1 - $4 per channel means that potentially you only need to hit 10 channels before you’re past what the cable company is charging for a whole bundle. And while I’m sure there are people that only watch 2 or 3, I think the vast majority of people are watching well over 10.

Posted by Shawn on December 22, 2009 at 8:59 AM (PST)

4

The only problem with non-bundled Cable channels is that Niche Channels like TechTV and SciFi (sorry… SyFy) won’t get substantial funding. This would be bad in the short-term.

In the long-term, however, I think this may actually be a good thing as Niche Shows would be forced onto mainstream channels, and would no longer be Niche. Great shows like BSG and Warehouse 13 would get more exposure.

Also yes, I would pay more for programming without Advertisements, I would pay about Au$3.00 per episode, if I could choose which shows I wanted to watch, which happens to be how much TV Shows cost on iTunes.

Posted by Dan Woods on December 22, 2009 at 11:50 AM (PST)

5

I’m paying around $50/month for my satellite, no premium channels, and if I didn’t have kids, there’s no way that price would be remotely justified. With the amount of TV me and my wife watch, it works out to around $0.60/show watched, generally pretty close to commercial free via DVR. We don’t watch channels, we watch *shows*. The DVR was to my television viewing what the iPod was to my music listening. I no longer care about network nor sponsor, I view only what I want to, and you’d better have one good advertising campaign if you expect me to learn about your new show or product because it’s going to have to be good enough that it makes it past my twitchy fast-forward finger.

What I want to see is Apple do something truly innovative. The bottom line is that $0.60/show is what they’re competing with, and that amount is subsidized by the amount of Nick Jr and PBS I’m streaming into the house with my kids. If Apple can replace my DVR/Satellite for *less* money, they get my sale. If Apple thinks I’m going to pony up $30/month in addition to what I’m already paying because they can’t replace what I’ve got now, they shouldn’t even bother.

What I want is to get away from the entire notion of broadcast media altogether outside of things where it makes sense (sports, viewer interactive competitions and reality shows, news, etc.). Dramas, comedies, movies, etc., should all be a la carte and on demand. Let’s use technology to cut the networks out of the equation altogether, not just come with a way to create another monthly bill no one needs.

Posted by Code Monkey in Midstate New York on December 23, 2009 at 9:33 AM (PST)

If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods/iPhones/iPad or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod/iPhone/iPad products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.

Recent Reviews

New Deals

Shop for Accessories: Cases, speakers, chargers, etc.

iLounge

News