“Since Apple launched its wildly successful iTunes music store back in 2003, CEO Steve Jobs has adamantly refused to offer a monthly subscription service. If you want to buy music from iTunes, you do it either by the single or the album, that’s it. But that could soon change,” Paul R. La Monica reports for CNNMoney.
“Les Ottolenghi, CEO of INTENT MediaWorks, a digital distribution system that works with peer-to-peer networks, said he’s had meetings with people from Apple and he believes the company will announce a subscription service for iTunes within the next six months. ‘I think Apple is seriously considering a subscription offering right now even though they will probably tell you otherwise,’ he said. Spokespeople for Apple were not immediately available for comment,” La Monica reports.
La Monica reports, “So far though, it appears that Apple has made the right decision to spurn the subscription model. Rival online music stores, such as Napster, RealNetworks’ Rhapsody and Yahoo’s Y! Music Unlimited, that offer monthly subscriptions have failed to attract a lot of interest. In fact, I wrote yesterday about how teens widely prefer iTunes to subscription-based music stores.”
“But Ottolenghi said that even though music subscription services have struggled against iTunes so far, he doesn’t think consumers are necessarily averse to paying monthly subscriptions. He argues that because Apple doesn’t offer a subscription product, that’s why music fans haven’t embraced the model,” La Monica reports.
Full article here.
Subscriptions for music? Well, okay, whatever – for those that want that option. But, subscriptions for movies and/or TV shows, now that could have some real widespread interest!
Related articles:
CNET Editor: Apple will soon introduce subscription-based music and video service – June 01, 2006
Consultant: Apple iPod dominance holding back subscription services – April 17, 2006
EMI Music Chairman: Music subscription services like Napster and Rhapsody haven’t beeen huge – January 23, 2006
Subscription services work the same for Movies and TV as they do for Music.
This guy doesn’t get it but I do. Movies & TV, yes, Music, not so much.
As calpundit pointed out, the fact that this guy is talking is pretty good proof that Apple didn’t go for it.
Apple is making deals every day with labels and studios. It’s possible that they may need to add a subscription service to get a deal. Having one researched and ready to go would be a helluva bargaining chip.
Perhaps such a bargaining chip would not be necessary to get a studio on-board, because iTunes is the-place-to-be and everyone knows it. But Steve is trying to get rid of DRM, and that might take some dealing.
dallas:
W. Churchill once said “There is no such thing as public opinion, only published opinion”. MDN is published opinion, not public opinion. There are as many and as diverse opinions as there are us publishers.
Personally I like it that Mac users are critical and strongly opinionated since it shows they care – versus the seemingly indifference in Windows users. It is good to be critical of Apple as well as MS.
Every user reserves the right to change their mind e.g. Apple users are becoming more critical of the Mighty Mouse over time, while once they praised it. So too, rental/subscription services for video content. Criticism of Apple and MS will make for better purchasing decisions now and product design in the future.
Anyone who publicly reveals inside information based on meetings with people from Apple has either never had such a meeting, or will never have one again.
I’d like to see movie rental (maybe with a 7 day grace period).
Well, in the realm of the digital, “rental” is an odd term.
Why do you rent a movie? Because it’s cheaper than owning it. You pay, what, $1 a day to rent it (it’s been awhile since I rented a movie–between cable, VOD, and pay-per-view)?
Now why do they charge you $1 a day? Because you have a physical thing. If you don’t return it, nobody else can watch it. But that’s not true with digital distribution. Apple can ship out as many copies as people want.
So what happens when you “return” a digital rental?
Actually, here’s what I’d like to see: $0.99 a day movies. You’ll be charged $0.99 per day for your movie (no pro-rating, 24 hour periods). Same DRM scheme as purchasing the movie. Apple will charge you every 24 hours until your rental cost exceeds the price of the movie, at which point it’s yours.
Obviously, the interface will need some way to say, “I’m done watching this. Stop charging me.” When you do that, it erases the movie from your hard drive.
For example, let’s say I want to watch “Jump In!” (since that came up on iTunes) from my living room. I press the “Rent” button in the store and it’s sent to my hard drive, just like I bought it. So I sit back and watch it. When it’s done, I hit the “Return” button and it’s gone. Total charge: $0.99.
So I want to watch “RoboCop.” I press the rent button in the store and it’s sent to my hard drive, just like I bought it. About halfway in, I decide to go to bed. So I hit “Stop” Next day, I sit down and watch the rent. When I’m done, I hit “Return”. Total charge: $1.98.
So I want to watch “The Incredibles.” I press the rent button in the store and it’s sent to my hard drive, just like I bought it. I decide that this is an amazing movie and I want to keep it. Solution: Don’t return it. It’ll keep charging me $0.99 until I get to $14.99 (16 days later). I suppose Apple could also a “Buy” button next to the “Return” button and would charge me the difference.
Here’s a more entertaining example, though. I’m in the airport getting ready to fly to New York. A movie would be fun to watch. So I rent “Six Days, Seven Nights.” I download it at the airport, transfer it to my iPod, and get on the plane. When I arrive in New York, I “return” it when I get to the hotel. So, basically, I can rent or return a movie anywhere there’s the Internet. Add this capability to your iPhone and that means just about anywhere.
MDN: “Subscriptions for music? Well, okay, whatever – for those that want that option. But, subscriptions for movies and/or TV shows, now that could have some real widespread interest!”
For me, I’d split the middle… In the past 5 years, I have paid maybe $50 for music (not including a $50 iTunes gift certificate I was given last year)… all on CDs… I do like music, but not enough to pay more than the cost of a single album per month. I’d certainly consider a subscription model at $10/month.
For TV, I feel the same way… I’ll subscribe for TV, so long as I can keep them as long as I want, though, realistically, I would delete everything right after watching, just like I do on my TiVo.
Movies however… Totally different… I’ll buy them. I collect movies, and I watch them constantly. I am holding off on a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player, but when the price for a COMBO player, such as the LG’s $1200 Super Multi-Blue Player, drops below $300, then, I’ll make the switch. I don’t expect that to happen before 2009 though. That’s fine. I am quite content with DVDs for now.
I got to say, though I’m against subscription services in general, for music or movies; if Apple was considering offering subscription services within 6 months, dude with the big mouth and smug attitude would definitely put them off for longer than 6 months.
But in general, with Apple moving away from DRM from music, I can’t see why they would embrace subscription model for music. Their research and others pretty much show that people prefer to own.
Now, I like the current subscription model for TV Shows. Subscribe to a season and the shows auto-download. The one downside is new shows. If you’ve never watch a show, you don’t want to subscribe immediately, but there is no option exclude previous purchases, if you decided you like or love a show. For me, this leads me to bittorrent. I download a few episodes (3-4) and see what I think, if I like, then I subscribe using iTunes.
Some TV Shows I go back to and back to again, and others I don’t; but I still wouldn’t want them to go away, after I paid for them.
But anyway, Apple always swears its potential partners to secrecy, so this guy and this company is pretty much dead meat, as I see it. If Apple wasn’t planning on subscription services, they’ll just call the guy an ass, and keep going; but if they were, I’d say, as of today, they are looking for a new partner.
Steve-
eMusic isn’t a typical subscription service. With eMusic, the tracks you download are yours forever. While with most subscription services, once you stop paying, you lose all access to whatever tracks you downloaded.
My only complaint about eMusic is that their library is relatively small.
Apple offer a music subscription service where you get to download but not keep the music — Never. Steve has been way too negative on this subject.
Apple package a service where you pick any song from their library and stream (not download) it to your computer or Apple TV — Maybe. Call it iTunes Radio Station — Be Your Own DJ — Whatever. A service like this would help push products like Apple TV and Airport Express that facilitate plugging iTunes into your stereo system.
Not the best idea, but I bet Apple does something with streaming music before they ever do anything with renting music.
Just a thought here. I just do not see subscription taking off. While I would love to have a small fee service where I could listen to the whole song to decide if I wanted it, or to try a new artist, etc, I would not do the subscription thing longterm.
The problem as I see it is the DRM. You have to have a DRM for subscription music. ANd it tends to always be a crude affair to have the song always checking back to see if you have paid or not, or to distruct in XX days.
But see, when you RENT, you have the digital song. If you have a ripper you get to get all the songs you want for one super low price. So Apple would have to constantly try and keep thiefts out of the system. It sounds like a lot of cludge and pain for no real profit. Don’t think it will sell. JMHO
ne
An “online” Netflix offering HD or near HD movies and TV shows will be huge. Apple must know this.
An online Netflix like service offering HD or near HD movies and TV shows for download will be huge. Apple must know this.
A netflixish queue system where the top 1, 2 or 3 shows in your queue get downloaded. When you are done watching one movie you remove it and the next one in your queue begins downloading.
I would subscibe to the TV shows & movies but not music
I would like to watch prison break on my time without paying the cable company the extra 9.95 a month for the dvr feature.
Most people want to own music but movies & tv shows would be more like a video store
obviously, for labels less people get paid for subscriptions, and what you can do with the files is limited. just a big pain in the ass.
if you love music, you actually want to own it.
for tv shows, I have some of the coolest movies on my computer, … that doesn’t mean i watch them once a week! subscriptions for video please.
The subscription (or more accurately “rental”) service will be for movies. People like to rent video. They did it with rental stores, then with website/mail-based rental. Apple will make 100% online rental business popular. There has never been successful rental business model for music; Apple will continue to NOT offer that service.
Subscription failed because it’s always been an either-or proposition. If you had BOTH then now you are talking. I would pay for a subscription to try out music, then buy what I like. I think I would be more likely to buy something with that model because as it stands now, I hate wasting my money / credits on something that sucks, so I end up not buying ANYTHING.
Let me rent movies. It will be HUGE. iTunes would become the new Blockbuster and adoption will skyrocket. Even naysayers would buy tv in a blink.
Most normal people have always argued AGAINST subscription in music. Don’t you want to own your music which you listen to again and again?
Most normal people only watch a film once, so owning 99% of the films you watch is senseless. Subscription via iTunes? Yes please.