Bloomberg: New Apple services off to a slow start in first year

Bloomberg News’ Mark Gurman writes today that Apple’s new services – Apple TV+, Apple Arcade, Apple News+, and Apple Card — are “off to a slow start in first year.”

When you buy something using Apple Card, you get a percentage of your purchase back in Daily Cash. Not a month from now, but every day. There’s no limit to how much you can get. And it goes right onto your Apple Cash card, so you can use it just like cash. Get 3% Daily Cash on everything you buy from Apple, whether you buy it at an Apple Store,, the App Store, or iTunes. That includes games, in‑app purchases, and services like your Apple Music subscription and iCloud storage plan. And at select partners such as Uber, Uber Eats, and. now, Walgreens, you'll get 3% Daily Cash when you use Apple Card with Apple Pay. Just as you do at Apple.
Apple Card

Mark Gurman for Bloomberg News:

After a few quarters on the market, the offerings haven’t contributed much to Apple’s top line.

MacDailyNews Take: Well, Apple TV+ is free for the first year to buyers of most Apple products, so there’s that.

Gurman continues:

When Apple reports results on July 30, investors will be looking for updates on these offerings. Services growth has been a bright spot in recent years as iPhone sales have slowed. For the fiscal third quarter, analysts forecast $13.1 billion in revenue from services, up 15% from a year earlier. Most of those gains will come from existing services, such as the App Store and licensing deals, rather than the new offerings.

MacDailyNews Take: Gurman’s premise for this one seems to rest heavily on the guesstimates of a single analyst, Sanford C. Bernstein analyst Toni Sacconaghi, as Apple does not report the results of each individual Apple Service.

You remember Toni Sacconaghi. He’s the “analyst” who couldn’t find millions of Apple’s “missing” iPhones on his first try.

Gurman continues:

These new services may grow more later.

MacDailyNews Take: Breaking news.


  1. The world needs a leftist news source. Where else does today’s rising BLM/Antifa executive go to for up to the second information about news, like the best buildings to rob and burn, where to go to shoot the most cops, who has a good deal on industrial fireworks and concrete shards and laser eye surgery devices?

  2. Is there anything that Apple does that actually meets everyone’s expectations. It’s not as though every company that starts a new venture is able to beat expectations. What is wrong with a slow start as long as a company is willing to try to improve over the long-term? Look at AppleWatch. It wasn’t an overnight success as some people thought it would be but it turned out very well over the years as Apple improved it. Of course, there’s the HomePod that never seem to catch on. For Apple, some things work out and some things don’t. There’s never any guarantee of success for any company, including Apple.

    I think if Apple tried hard, they could be as popular as Netflix if they simply wanted to throw money at purchasing all sorts of content. Netflix doesn’t have the greatest business model in the world. It seems most of their value is due to subscriber growth and not revenue and profits. I wish Apple had more filler content of older TV shows, movies, (science) documentaries and Japanese and Korean dramas. I’m sure Apple would get more subscribers if that’s what it takes to make a good video streaming service. As long as the streaming service sells more Apple hardware, that’s a good thing. I don’t think Apple should be directly compared to Netflix which has been doing video streaming for years.

    I have Amazon Prime video and I enjoy it just watching older TV and movie content along with some good and so-so new content. I watch a lot of old documentaries which I find entertaining. For me, the whole yearly Amazon Prime package is a good deal. Maybe if Apple packages all of its services under one price it could be a powerful draw for subscribers.

    1. Holy crap you are as dumb as a rock. ANYONE involved in rating stocks or working at any brokerage is watched like a hawk by the SEC. All trades are scrutinized. ANY conflict of interest in a crime and rigorously prosecuted. Anyone who has had a job in the industry knows this and avoids getting into this kind of trouble. Clearly someone as stupid as you would be caught immediately.

      You are as clueless a cretin as anyone who has ever posted here and what’s amazing is that you are brazenly proud of it.

      1. “ANY conflict of interest in a crime and rigorously prosecuted” with the implication that offenders would be brought to justice is clearly false; After all, what’s the use of prosecuting toothlessly? Correct would be “ANY conflict of interest in a crime and [if the SEC discovered it, is] rigorously prosecuted,” but the prosecution is conditional and situational, not consistent across the board for every citizen.

        For example, “The final bill barred lawmakers from insider trading…required [legislators] to report all trades within 30 days…The Stock Act…deterred some lawmakers from making trades. Pelosi, one of the House’s wealthiest members, sold Visa shares and bought Apple and Disney, among 16 trades she made over the past two years…the bill’s enforcement mechanisms have been hard to implement…no one has been convicted of insider trading under the Stock Act. And when the Securities and Exchange Commission sought to enforce the act in recent years, it ran up against sweeping opposition in Congress.

        That case involves a former Ways and Means Committee staff director, who allegedly leaked information that Medicare reimbursement rates were about to rise in 2013. The tip found its way to a political intelligence firm, Height Securities, which sent information to hedge funds that rushed to buy stock in Humana, a company that benefited from the rate hike.

        The House counsel refused to comply with the SEC subpoena discovery documents and interviews related to its investigation. He said, “…the information requested by the SEC is protected under the speech and debate clause.”

        No, these insider trades were not “rigorously prosecuted.”

        In any case, your use of “dumb…stupid…clueless… and cretin” to demean a person rather than focusing the target the substance of the argument makes your unfortunate response an ad hominem attack which is a logical fallacy, hence irrational.

  3. It seems to me that analysts and speculators more often than not pooh pooh Apple’s newly introduced goods and services. So I did not unexpect this judgement.

Reader Feedback

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