From The Wall Street Journal:
Apple ’s extravagant unveiling on Monday of AppleTV+, its new video content streaming service, unveiled very little. Celebrities talked about their must-see shows without showing any clips. Apple executives trumpeted their plan to offer a bundle of content from different content partners without offering any details on pricing. So what to make of this newest entrant into the fiercely competitive and crowded streaming race?
Apple’s service will offer original shows in addition to content from companies like HBO, Starz, and Showtime. In that respect, it looks a lot like what consumers get on Amazon Prime—a mix of original and partnered content—curated by a tech company that has decided to maximize its current business by leveraging mass desire for incessant entertainment. For Amazon Prime members, however, viewing is free; Apple’s service almost certainly won’t be.
And does it make sense for the iPhone maker to be getting into content anyway? The company first put out its streaming box in 2007, but it has never commanded much market share. (Around 13% of connected TV users use the Apple box, according to eMarketer). The new service is mostly a way to draw more revenue out of Apple’s existing users.
That said, Apple is going to be writing big checks. The main point of its glitzy event seemed to be to showoff the talent it already has signed: names like Steven Spielberg, Oprah, Reese Witherspoon, Jennifer Aniston, M. Night Shyamalan and J.J. Abrams.
. . . .
If Netflix investors were worried, however, they didn’t show it. At the end of the big day, Apple shares were down 1.21% and Netflix’s were up 1.45%. Beneath all the glitz and fanfare, that may be the core takeaway: Apple is late to the game, and Netflix has an enormous lead. The newcomer also will be competing against media stalwarts such as Disney , Hulu and CBS. Consumers opt in and out of services with a few clicks, tuning in for a show on one service only to drop it after a few weeks in favor of another.
Link to the rest at The Wall Street Journal
Announced in March, available in September, not many specifics on what the content will be.
Lame.
They needed to pre-announce now. If they waited much longer they would be literally the last to announce. Like most vaporware announcements, the objective is to freeze the market and keep the faithful from committing to other services. And there will be no shortage of services to choose from.
Between now and September Viacom, NBC UNIVERSAL, Disney, WarnerMedia, and a dozen smaller Media Companies will be launching new streaming services. This on top of the dozens of existing majors:
https://www.consumerreports.org/streaming-media-devices/guide-to-subscription-streaming-video-services/
And hundreds of niche services on FireTV and Roku.
Much like ebooks, Apple is jumping into a mature market full of established competitors with a me-too product targeted at the faithful. It won’t make a big splash in the broader market but it’ll make a profit.
Same. For my family it’s Korean soaps and TV series from Spain and Australia. And Turkey, too, now that I think about it. Last visit, my father was trying to place the face of an actress in an Icelandic mystery mini-series he was watching.
“She’s ‘Elizabeth’ on Poldark,” I said.
I love Netflix for bringing the world to our living rooms. It’s weird because back when I had cable, there was nothing to watch on hundreds of channels. Now? All at my fingertips. I do wish there was a “TV Guide 2.0” for streamers, though.
As far as I can tell, so far Amazon (and presumably Apple) don’t get that, in addition to the blockbusters, a big part of Netflix’s appeal is the oddball but fascinating international fare. Some of my favorite shows of recent years include Call My Agent (France), El Ministero del Tiempo (Spain–fantastic s.f.), Shtisel and Mossad 101 (Israel), and a couple of really far-out Turkish series (no kidding). I hear about them on social media from various friends, so I know others are watching, too.
They could improve that by including the language in the blurb so the low-brows like me could avoid non-English stuff. And, yes, we’re too dumb to read subtitles.
^THIS^
And, no, Terrence, we’re not dumb – God just made a design mistake when he didn’t give us independently rotatable eyes so as to read the dialog at the same time as watching the action. (Or so an acquaintance who is multi-lingual assures me.)
Amazon Prime has a lot of weird international fare. But you have to either find it, or get on the recommendation track in some way.
I am always finding weird stuff….
The key difference between what Apple is trying and what Netflix is doing is that Netflix relies on big data to decide what specific kinds of content to fund whereas Apple is dishing out blank checks to name producers, often with no idea what they’re funding.
Some of Netflix’s most effective investments have been on no-name projects by lesser known names. RomComs, teen flicks, family films, SF&F, and other genre efforts. They have a treasure trove of viewer data where Apple is going in almost blind.
Apple is way behind in the list of competitors Netflix worries about. Front of the line is Prime with Disney at number two. Apple probably comes in at 10 or so.
Disney has a strong competitive advantage in entertainment production. Prime has a strong competitive advantage because if the customer tie-in with Amazon shipping. Netflix has a competitive advantage because they created the business and have succeeded.
I don’t know what Apple’s competitive advantage is in mass market entertainment. Their strength is in machines, operating systems, and apps. Perhaps they can link them into the entertainment stuff. Maybe they ca do something with 5G.
Their competitive advantage is brand loyalty.
They’ve corralled 38M paying subscribers for their generic music subscription service in three years. They won’t have a problem finding a few million willing to pay $20 or more a month for a show or two. Should be good for a billion or two a year.
Of course, Netflix and Amazon have well over 100M subscribers each but there’s good money in being an also-ran when your customers are price-insensitive (Just look at the Macintosh business.)
In music, they were first with iTunes, and they were successful. That gave them a competitive advantage in music. Like Netflix was first with video.
The Onion summed it up pretty well.
“Tech giant Apple officially unveiled to the public a panicked and completely idea-free man.”
I wasn’t talking about iTunes,but rather the Apple Music streaming music subscription service. The one that is a me tootoSpotify, Pandora Premium, Amazon Music, and Youtube premium among many others. it came late, with less options to try, and is still making good money off the Apple name.
Yes, it came late, and it came from a company that had an established name in online music. But the others you mention had already passed them by.
This was some years ago, so things may have changed – but my family once had a cable package that included HBO, Starz, and Showtime. When finances tightened, I was looking for things to cut – and found that none of the family had ever changed the channel to any of the three.
(Recently “cut the cable,” too, as nobody was really watching any of that, either, since we got Netflix in.)
Yawn. Sorry Apple, but I don’t see any ‘must see’ talent. Part of that is because a ‘big name’ doesn’t mean it will always be a ‘must see’ type show.
And if they do manage to produce something everyone says I ‘must see’? I’ll wait until there’s at least a dozen and then ‘check out’ your service for a month and then disconnect until I have another dozen.
We have Netflix because my mother needs to be semi-watching something while she knits or works on a puzzle. (and Prime is there but not used often.)
“At the end of the big day, Apple shares were down 1.21% and Netflix’s were up 1.45%.”
Yeah, I’m not the only one that’s yawning … 😉