Media companies want Apple to charge more than $40/month for Internet TV service

“While the tech industry has circled Sept. 9 as the date the new iPhone will be revealed, I am looking forward to it for a different reason: the new Apple TV box,” Jessica E. Lessin reports for The Information.

“I feel this way despite the fact Apple isn’t going to debut a fancy new television service with the box,” Lessin reports. “The long, long, long-rumored television service remains delayed because Apple still can’t get the economics to work, people who have talked to the company about it have told me.”

“There’s still a big gap between the price media companies want for their TV channels and the roughly $40 a month Apple wants to charge consumers. Something has to give,” Lessin reports. “But I’m increasingly convinced Apple’s fate in the living room doesn’t hang on its cable killer — even if it is way cooler than cable.”

Full article (subscription required) here.

MacDailyNews Take: If Apple packs enough goodies into the next-gen Apple TV, they’ll get so many units into homes that the media companies won’t be able to hold out any longer. Then the Internet TV service will simply be the icing on the cake; an add-on that some Apple TV customers will welcome once the deals are finally stuck.

Why the massive venue for Apple’s September 9th special event? – August 28, 2015
Get ready, Apple is about to unveil the first real Apple TV – August 28, 2015
Will we see the ‘Apple Car’ on September 9th? – August 28, 2015
Apple to reveal ‘something big’ on September 9th – August 27, 2015
It’s official: Apple sends out September 9th special event invitations – August 27, 2015
Apple expected to hold massive special event at Bill Graham Civic Center in San Francisco on September 9th – August 27, 2015
Mystery company books San Francisco’s massive Bill Graham Civic Auditorium through September 13th – August 24, 2015


  1. AppleTV content package has to be an add-on anyway since such content agreements will have to be negotiated by regions and sadly many large Apt buildings force Apt owners to have the same content so residents of such apt blocks will never get a choice to cut the cord. I live in such a building and I have written letters, attended the board meetings and no progress. Sad but that is the current state in US of A.

    I think A device that con compete with xbox/Playstation, WII, and nice to have such as dual camera for 3D recognition/FaceTime, 4K output option (since 4K TVs are widely available), and home kit central processor makes a very compelling solution and one that makes the Apple EcoSystem is the only one that matters.

    Go Apple

    1. The requirement to have only one cable company in your building… You signed the agreement to restrict yourself. (Same as any other renter, or home owners association. You agreed to restrict your rights, bitching to them does nothing.. Legally they are right)

      They do that in buildings so they don’t have 18 cable and satellite companies installing equipment in there.

      Not directing anything at you, it’s just that so many people fail to read the fine print on agreements like that. They look at the house/apartment/etc and are willing to sign anything. And anymore HOA are as bad, and worse, than rental agreements. (Cause people sign without really reading)
      Think about it, android is free… But comes with many problems. People see free… And accept the problems without really knowing the downside of android.

      Their building, their rules.

      As far as the Apple TV, $40 or more a month isn’t the real issue for me.
      DVR with commercial skip is. If the Apple TV has every channel for $40/month but I can’t get around the stupid commercials.. Or watch when/if internet is down..

      1. “As far as the Apple TV, $40 or more a month isn’t the real issue for me.
        DVR with commercial skip is. If the Apple TV has every channel for $40/month but I can’t get around the stupid commercials.. Or watch when/if internet is down..”

        Nice… Didn’t think about lacking DVR services. I hope Apple sees the big picture. Not going backwards, not for me.

        1. Apple will not include a PVR, they will re-jig the iCloud to play back the show you want – hence heavily rely on internet connection.

          The only cable to your TV will be cat-5 or wifi not coaxial.

        2. You seem to be trapped by thinking with the tools of yesteryear. We will either pay with hard earned money for our shows or we will get relevant ads that are targeted to us and what we need each day/week/month that will not intrude on our enjoyment. We don’t have to get the same type of ads that blanket entire nations without respect for who they force it on.

          Open your mind to possibilities and think of what will work based on new paradigms.

          1. Ads based on my personal information meant to manipulate me into making purchases I would otherwise not – I have willpower – the simple attempt of prying into my personal space to make that determination to do so, is what bothers me. I don’t mind “nationally based ads”

            But the issue here, at the moment, we pay at both ends. One side, by watching adverts, and the other by paying for the connectivity. If I have to watch ads, then I should only pay for the connectivity itself, which I believe I already do. I don’t watch ads on Netflix, or even Amazon Prime. The networks charge the connection services for the content, even though they carry ads. The double dippers are the likes of CBS and the other networks.

            This is why Apple “must” buy Disney. They need to set the system straight or else it won’t get any better. Once things settle down, they can spin it off and hopefully the problem will go away.

            It’s not that Capitalism is/isn’t bad, it simply has no bounds. It isn’t capable of self regulation, over time. So it needs sow outside influence, competition. We have no competition in the media industry, we have a very strong collusion to take as much money as they can.

            Many Americans pay more than $100 per month for TV, and it’s supposed to be free – with ads.

            If I am paying $40/mo, then Apple has to give in and remove the ads or give a service worth $40/mo, like a la cart, VOD, with same day broadcast. I get 20-30 channels of what I want without CMTV or FOX News. All in HD. And I can swap them out at any time.

            Just an idea. I am not trying to be demanding or over reaching, but the system has to be fixed, changed, made better and worth the cost without all the fluff.

            1. $100, even $40/month (+ extra for the internet access), would be WAY TOO MUCH in Europe, where a basic TV-subscription can be had for €10/mo.
              If Apple, let alone the media companies, don’t see the light, they will have zero (aka zip, none, … ) subscribers.

  2. Media companies get how to charge for services we don’t want and make it nearly impossible to get the media we want without paying extra. WE DON’T WANT CHANNELS, we want content when we want it and with an easy way to pay for it.

    We are not a revenue stream for the media companies but are people who want to be delighted and entertained. Come on media companies, try treating us like people.

    1. The Music companies all said the same thing… price it higher Apple.

      The Book publishers too tooted to the same tune… price it higher Apple.

      Boo hoo… no no no. Less is more… more customers is better.

  3. Sounds like the TV Channels and cable companies are “colluding”. Where are those bitch judges now? Why aren’t they going after them?

    Everyone knows the broadcast stations along with the cable companies are in bed together. They will do everything they can to keep Apple out. Apple is threatening their life blood and just like the record companies that made us buy albums with 1 or 2 good songs, the cable companies feed us with hundreds of channels so they can sell more advertising space. Oh yeah, this is about ad revenue to the stations and the monthly fees to the cable companies totally.
    It has nothing to do with the consumer and they don’t care. Where is the consumer advocate judges now? Bitches!!!

    1. Considering issues with DirecTV and Dish Network, I can be pretty certain there is no collusion in that market. They are constantly at each other. It tends to be the customer rabble-rousing to have one or the other side settle.

  4. The poor, poor media companies can f right off demanding more than $40. That’s already higher than some cable packages, and I got rid of mine almost 3 years ago, relying on the dozen over-the-air channels and Netflix.

    Part of the reason was that the specialty channels had turned to crap. MTV wasn’t showing MVs anymore, History wasn’t showing history, Discovery was making fake documentaries, etc etc. I’m much better off not spending $60/mo on garbage.

    Hey Apple, Music TV will destroy years of success.
    Greedy companies. I’ll stick with youtube now thanks.
    The world chanced… no more live tv… on demand for life.
    oops there’s youtube live too. :/

  6. I read where a well know female star of a popular TV show gets about $250,000 per episode. Not per season, but per episode. And, of course, all the big shot directors produces and other actors want big salaries. Somebody has to pay for it and it might as well be the viewers. Doesn’t that make you feel good?

    1. $250k per episode? The cast of Friends were getting $1 million dollars each episode 13 years ago. This is nothing new.

      I don’t blame the actors / actresses / show staff, if the media companies are making millions, they deserve as much as they can possibly get.

      There’s a reason why reality TV became what it is or why shows like Who Wants to be a Millionaire? Created. Even if they gave out a million bucks in a show, they’d still be millions ahead of a show with a crew, story, actors etc.

Reader Feedback

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