Apple’s next-gen Apple TV to cost $149?

“Rumors suggest the revised Apple TV will be thinner and slightly wider, with iOS 9 acting as the software core of the device,” Mark Reschke writes for T-GAAP. “A state-of-the-art A9 processor, Siri integration, an app store, HomeKit and possible Force Touch remote control are all said to be apart of Apple’s new black box.”

“During an Apple Watch special event in March, CEO Tim Cook announced Apple TV would begin selling at a price of $69,” Reschke writes. “For years Apple TV had been selling at $99. The lower price not only saw an increase in Apple TV sales, but also paved the way for an all-new Apple TV to enter the market at a higher price point. ”

“The lower price for the current Apple TV also gives Apple the flexibility to continue selling it as an entry level option, competing with Roku and others in the sub-$100 market,” Reschke writes. “Thus we anticipate the new Apple TV having 32GB – 64GB of internal storage, and costing $149.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Hopefully, Apple has now created room to return to the sweet spot of $99 and not have to go higher as Reschke suggests or adoption will risk being negatively affected.

SEE ALSO:
Will Apple TV kill cable? – August 19, 2015
Apple’s Internet TV: How many TV networks will make the cut? – August 18, 2015
The next-gen Apple TV’s marquee feature – August 18, 2015

27 Comments

  1. It could combine with an Express to be a one-stop box.

    Or it could have inputs for antenna/disc/whatever and be able to stream that content to other $69 Apple TVs.

    It could have a CableCARD slot and stream via MoCA.

    It could do all of the above…..

    ….blah blah blah yada yada yada etc. etc.

  2. lol…..that was my guess the other day! If it has a new touch remote, etc it sounds like a higher price point around $149 to me. Hopefully not, but wouldn’t be surprised.

    1. It would be HUGE mistake to go over $99. With Apple TV (unlike most other Apple hardware products), the profit will eventually come from the subscription services, not from selling the hardware. That means it needs to be accessible for potential customers and sell in large numbers, and the previous (current $69 3rd gen) Apple TV (with millions in active use) needs to be able to access those subscription services.

      I think it will be A8-based, because the new iPod touch has an A8 and makes Apple TV 64-bit. There’s no need for it to be the brand new A9; the current version uses a lowly single-core A5. Also, this new remote control can’t be so fancy that it costs more than about $20 by itself to produce, and use so much power that it needs to be recharged regularly. A simple touch pad (allowing gestures) that replaces the current directional control (and select) buttons fits the bill nicely, and can probably still work over IR (which saves power).

      The article suggests that Apple will keep the existing Apple TV around at $69 (as the entry-level choice) and add this more expensive model. That does not make sense, because it would compete with the new model. For Apple TV, the choice should be simple and accessible. Just one affordable and universal model. It’s about the subscription services that will customize Apple TV for each customer, not hardware choices.

        1. Thanks for taking the time to read my “uninformed bullshit.” 🙂 I don’t care if you agree or not. I care MORE when someone confirms reading the post with a vote (of any kind) or reply (of any kind). 🙂

      1. Most customers who are more concerned about quality truly don’t care about price — and Apple knows this.

        I agree with the idea of a $99 price point being enticing, but if I knew I was getting a solid, polished product with great features, then I wouldn’t mind spending the extra $50.

        Besides, I want the TV to last me years.

    1. If the device runs iOS, then it would most certainly run PLEX for iOS. Hopefully it will be completely rewritten for that device.

      I expect the device to cost at least $150 and I don’t have a problem with that if it can be used as a halfway respectable gaming console.

  3. There is a survey on 9to5 asking participants the maximum they would pay for AAA games on the new Apple TV. One of the commentors is suggesting the pay structure could be similar to a monthly subscription, instead of $20 to $50 for individual games.

    So, how about this idea: Apple Music is currently $10 a month. Unlimited app downloads (which would include higher quality console games) could be something like $10 a month and a skinny bundle service could be around $25 a month. Discounts would be applied when combining services. For example, unlimited music and unlimited app downloads could be $15 a month or the combo all three services could be $30 a month. Disruptive enough?

    1. I don’t think games and general purpose “apps” are in the realm of Apple TV. You are describing a platform that attaches to a large (non-touch) screen, has its own App Store, and runs applications (including games) using more complex input devices such as game controller, keyboard, and trackpad (or other mouse equivalent). That’s called a Macintosh. In addition to my Apple TV, I have my older Mac connected to my HDTV; I run apps on it and control it with a Bluetooth keyboard.

      I think this coming evolution of Apple TV does have third-party “apps,” but only apps that deliver a more diverse selection of content choices. For example, the Netflix, YouTube, ESPN, Showtime, HBO, and Hulu content choices are effectively “apps” already on Apple TV (equivalent to those apps on iPhone and iPad). Apple adds the significant feature of allowing third parties to add new content choices to Apple TV. ANY online content provider could have access to Apple TV customers (subject to Apple’s approval), using dev tools and guidelines from Apple; this customizes Apple TV for each customer. The “store” is a new Apple TV screen for selecting and managing these content choices, and access to each third-party content choice is by (separate) PAID monthly subscription. “A la carte” movies and TV shows sold by Apple (including rentals) continue.

      As for using a Mac as the “Apple TV with apps,” Apple should make this more accessible and obvious by creating a new Mac mini (that is REALLY mini). It is Intel-based like any Mac, so it runs existing and future Mac apps (including games). It has a variant of the tiny logic board design used by the recent MacBook, saving engineering cost. It has a built-in “Apple TV” app. When running this Apple TV app, this Mac acts like a stand-alone Apple TV (the new version). It even comes with the same “touchpad remote control.” User is responsible for supplying other Mac-compatible input devices (like with current Mac mini). Price, starting at $399.

      This “downward” movement of Mac mini has started with the existing models. It leaves room in the desktop Mac lineup for a NEW design that is a true “headless” iMac (in terms of performance specs). Maybe it could be a new “Cube.” 🙂

  4. And now, just Apps and App Store, as well as an awesome and powerful graphic chip, ability to have wireless gamepad and you’ll not only get a TV boxset for streaming, access to your iCloud content, etc… but also have a Next Gen Game Console with access to all current iPad games already. Even at $199 it would work if the graphics is as good (or even better) than the PS4 or Xbox One. Add ability to use any bluetooth gamepad, or one of the $39-49 Apple Gamepad, and you’re ready to go… I’m just sayin’

  5. It wouldn’t surprise me for Apple to create an artificial price barrier (raising to $149) for the new Apple TV, so as to stagger new user adoption. Plus, if the feature set is more compelling, potentially with new features and access to content from Apple’s servers, why not?

    At the end of the day, Apple TV is a device to sell or rent content so when Apple is ready to open up to all comers the price will drop.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.