Apple answered two questions in a day, or rather a CNBC report citing a member of the company. Why are the shows planned so boring? And what is he planning to do to find a place in an increasingly competitive media market? They will repeat the success they had with U2's "Songs of Innocence" and adapt it to everyone.
To be clear, the report suggests that Apple will give its original content free of charge to anyone with an iOS device or tvOS (the Macs seem to have been excluded). Users will find a brilliant new app at the beginning of next year, titled "TV," which will offer free of charge the entire series of comedies and drama series by Apple .
Users will have the option to subscribe to "channels", for example HBO, through which they will be able to watch programs from these providers. Who will be allowed on this platform? It's vague. How will billing work? Not clear. Will it replace stand-alone applications for Netflix, for example? Not clear. How does this differ from iOS to tvOS? Not clear.
The only thing that is clear is that Apple works with a huge leverage position as being the only company that can or is right to launch a shared media channel via a donation of Billion dollars. No doubt there will be other ways to silence the competition: the search functionality and Siri will probably be better for television; it will have integrations with other first-party applications; the users who use the TV application by default if they find a show they like, that sort of thing.
Some of you may be wondering: Can Apple really spend a billion dollars on content and then give it away for free? The answer is unequivocal yes. This company is rich, impossible to imagine, and could do it every year if it wanted to (and in fact, it might have to do it a little bit). In addition, it is a billion dollar investment in a platform he hopes to trap in the media. "
Here's the plan: First, you get a basic level of acceptable emissions on the TV app so it's not a fallow land and people can get used to it by always staying with both other dozens of permanent applications. Then you hire partners and chains to put their products on it because it's a "simpler experience" or something and you collect the rent when they do it.
Once you've reached critical mass, you reveal your second tier of content – the right stuff – and a ridiculously low price, like $ 30 a year, or less with iCloud elements. Unlike other companies, Apple does not need to make money to bill what it wants. Too low and people think it's just a hobby, too high and they will not pay for it over Netflix and HBO. Sweeten the deal with special prices as you stray from the chains, as they can not afford to leave this new walled garden and tell consumers to take the lead.
In the meantime, of course, this is only available on Apple hardware. So you can better lock people into the ecosystem and maybe even sell some Apple TVs.
In the end, they buy their share of the market with a big upfront payment to move and lock in a sizable portion of the existing public in their own application – a familiar maneuver.
Money, well, they've already spent it. And possibly on content of dubious quality. This is one of the main flaws of this plan: Apple's discretion may result in a TV application containing garbage, in which case (hopefully) no one will use it at all and society will not the leverage it needs to intimidate other media companies to join us.
You may remember how this type of forced content game worked with U2. After putting "Songs of Innocence" on everyone's computer, the reaction was so strong that Bono apologized personally . It turns out that Apple is not really a creator of taste – they just make the phones they use.
In this case, it may be that their attempt to overthrow the creators of taste of that era – like Netflix and HBO, who rebuilt the television industry from the ground up – is fanciful and doomed to failure (or at least at a given time). ignominious limbo).