62% of Apple TV+ subscribers are on free trials

In the fourth quarter of 2020, the majority of Apple TV+ subscribers, 62 percent, said they were on the free trial offer that Apple extended to buyers of its hardware devices, according to research firm MoffettNathan’s Q4 2020 SVOD Tracker report.

Apple TV+ is home to the biggest directors and top stars
Apple TV+ is home to the biggest directors and top stars

Todd Spangler for Variety:

What’s worrisome for Apple: 29% of those said they do not plan to resubscribe once the promo period expires; only 30% said they plan to renew at the regular $4.99/month price (and the rest were unsure).

By comparison, 16% of Disney+ users said they access the service via the Mouse House’s promotional partnership with Verizon… Almost half of Disney+ subs on the Verizon promo (48%) said they planned to resubscribe after the free-access period rolls off; just 19% saying they do not plan to renew. The data suggests that roughly 18% of Apple TV+ subscribers plan to churn off the service once their promotional offer ends, versus 3% of Disney+ customers on free plans, the MoffettNathanson report said.

Apple hasn’t disclosed how many Apple TV+ users it has. But it clearly doesn’t want to lose them: The company has extended the free-access period for Apple TV+ customers who signed up through its one-year-free subscription offer through July 2021.

Currently, Apple TV Plus offers a total of 55 originals (11 drama series, six comedy series, 13 nonfiction series, 11 films and 14 family series and specials). Those include breakouts like “The Morning Show” and “Ted Lasso,” but in terms of sheer tonnage, Apple TV Plus is far below the rest of the SVOD field.

MacDailyNews Take: It’s simple: Apple just needs to continue the promotion where customers who purchase a new iPhone, iPad, Apple TV, Mac, or iPod touch can enjoy one year of Apple TV+ for free.

Apple TV+ is yet another incentive to buy an Apple device.

The type of confused customer who wonders, “Gee, should I buy a real iPhone or a fake one?” might opt for the real deal if they know they’re going to get a year of Apple TV+ free, especially when they’ve heard of a Jennifer Aniston / Reese Witherspoon series, and seen that and other Apple TV+ exclusive series and movies scooping up awards.

Apple should run this “Buy an Apple Device, Get a Year of Apple TV+ Free” promo for a few years at least, and keep extending it for current trail users, so that people can become invested in Apple TV+ series and top-line films and change their mind about paying $4.99/month so they can keep watching Ted Lasso et al.

Since the initial launch of Apple TV+ a year ago, Apple has amassed an impressive lineup of original programming. It’s obvious that the company has decided to focus on the usual: Quality over quantity. But, over time the quantity of quality content will build Apple TV+ into a content powerhouse.

Those who can wrap their heads around Apple’s massive cash mountain and the company’s unparalleled ability to generate cash can clearly see who the winner will be. The most talented producers, writers, directors, editors, actors, etc. are attracted to exactly what Apple has and makes in vast abundance: Cash. The king. Like bears to honey, it’s happening already. — MacDailyNews, January 3, 2018

TTK! Prost, everyone! 🍻

42 Comments

  1. Appletv + has nearly all if not all woke filled media. It’s a bag of crap in a suitcase no one wants to pay for. Until they offer some diversity of thought in their programming many will continue not to buy it. I’ve dumped my free trial. Many others will dump as soon as they have to pay.

        1. “Diversity” as a measure of quality, regardless of the sector/medium is simply idiotic and sideways logic. Can something be excellent when diversity is sought? Sure, but when a guiding aim, the likelihood of it interfering with excellence is high.

          Artistic designs, driven by a mandated political narrative, are easy to perceive and the result of most is often clunky and clumsy. Propaganda is made with a similar focus and with such creations, “poetic” is usually not a description.

          Besides, in most cases, viewers look to be transported, not instructed.

    1. You Americans love TV. It makes me want to vomit watching TV shows. There are very few I like and also I choose to spend my time making money and being productive, not watching humans act out fiction.

  2. I just subscribed to Discovery+ (the ad-free option) and IMO it’s a far better value. My preference is more documentary-style programming and Discovery has a lot of good stuff. I’ll keep Apple + for a while but if it doesn’t improve I’ll dump it.

  3. i tried apple tv for several months and cancelled. too much preachy self righteous woke programs. just because timmy pays a lot of money for it doesnt mean it’s quality or interesting.

    1. I watched some as part of the “free” offer. Instead of subscribing, I’ve decided I don’t need any more digital time wasters. Getting out, moving the body and sweating a bit more will be a worthwhile exchange.

  4. I subscribed Disney+ for one month and I canceled afterwards because I had watched everything that was interesting for me. I already own most Pixar and animated Disney movies because we have kids that are now teenagers. I own all the Star Wars movies. What else is there to see? If you have younger kids D+ may be worth it.

  5. Do the people commenting on this website think they represent anything typical? You are commenting on a very specific tech website. You care enough about tech to comment. The typical consumer gets this free or bundles it. Neither variety nor MDN readers have a clue. Most people just set it and forget it. Last I read, there were a lot of Apple users out there, a lot more than the 8 (now 9) commenters on this site. Half of you just salivate to throw in your political screeds, to boot.

  6. not sure but i recall hearing appleTV would be airing a chronicled, 5part series on the HISTORICAL 2020 election fraud with flying monkeys, a manchurian candidate with small hands, a wicked, west-coast witch, a pride parade choir of michigan munchkins, a herd of rinos, and democrats from the land of dominion. i hear it promises an unbiased accounting.

    1. old news but as long as content is strictly filtered through mr cook’s values, aka apple values, appleTV subscibership will suffer.
      AND, on a personal note, a thing i share, i feel, with MOST all the super-smart mac users and, i know there are a lot of you here, i’m not one of the super-smart, BUT, regarding political and world news and political documentaries, i just want an honest and FULL picture, OBjectivity. if i lose, i want to lose with grace, if i win, i want to win with humility, i admit my limited awareness SOoooo, from my perspective, a woman’s perspective, I resent the lack of transparency in the various 2020 state-run elections, i resent the unwillingness to verify election integrity. As a intellectually curious mac user, i want honest, super-smart people to authenticate how the voting hardware/software has functioned AND how it has done so without interference and how it has maintained ONE citizen/ONE vote.
      as a citizen of the USA, that is my RIGHT. as citizens of the USA, that is your RIGHT. I don’t want to see dishonest lack of transparency elections shoved down AMerica’s throat. I AM A CITIZEN and a mac user. IF, indeed, you engaged in election theft, you have committed treason AND what should concern all Americans is this: upwards of 80million voters believe the biden/harris presidency is illegitimate.

      1. “the lack of transparency in the various 2020 state-run elections, i resent the unwillingness to verify election integrity.”

        What are you talking about? Perhaps you are misinformed. This was one of the most scrutinized elections in American history. Recounts — both machine and BY HAND — in the most contested states. At least 60 court cases. Fully informed statements by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and by the losing candidate’s own attorney general, among others.

        “how it has maintained ONE citizen/ONE vote.”
        Because of the electoral college, this is not true when it comes to presidential elections. Otherwise, Clinton would have become the president in 2017, when she won the popular vote in the 2016 election. Trump lost the popular both times he ran for president.

        and this: “upwards of 80million voters believe the biden/harris presidency is illegitimate.”

        Because they believe the Big Lie (look it up) that Trump and his enablers insisted that he won. Shall we be governed by a willfully ignorant minority that refuses to accept audited and verified facts because we don’t want to hurt their feelings? What new lie will they believe tomorrow? Trump never once achieved a 50% approval rating during all of his four years in office. Why is it so hard to believe he lost?

        Even if your “80million” number were true (you cite no source, so did you just make it up?), the rest, therefore, believe the Biden/Harris presidency IS legitimate — and they are the majority. By the way, 74 million voters cast their ballots for Trump, so if 80 million believe he should have won, the rest of them should have voted for him.

        Biden/Harris got 81 million votes. (My source? cookpolitical.com/2020-national-popular-vote-tracker)

        “IF, indeed, you engaged in election theft, you have committed treason”

        If, indeed, you stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, you have committed — well, not “treason,” to use your word (look it up to see what it really means) — but insurrection, and quite possibly, sedition. (You should probably look those up, too.)

        If you are, indeed, “intellectually curious,” it’s not hard to find out these facts yourself, even if you’re “not one of the super-smart.” (I’m not, either.) You could start here: news.yahoo.com/the-2020-election-wasnt-stolen-here-are-all-the-facts-that-prove-it-184623754.html

        Lots of facts there, including full responses to every one of your questions above and more.

        1. “This was one of the most scrutinized elections in American history. ” This statement is used to prove the veracity of the election.

          This was one of the most scrutinized presidents in American history. This is true. Shall it be used likewise to prove veracity after all is said and done? After years of accusations and investigations per Russian involvement, many people still think he was a Russian agent. Maybe you are one?

          Regardless, being “scrutinized” proves little. The number of election curiosities that occurred and remain are not giving some mere “idiot’s pause.”

          1. You wrote:
            “This was one of the most scrutinized elections in American history. ” This statement is used to prove the veracity of the election.

            You are correct, although it is not the statement itself, but the FACT of the scrutiny that verifies the election result. That result: Biden won. Trump lost.

            You may not like it, but so what? The other side didn’t like it last time, and they survived. There will be another election in four years. Try again then.

            After that, you lose me. Whatever it is you’re talking about, especially “The number of election curiosities that occurred” are all dealt with, in detail, in the URL I provided.

          2. The “oddities” have been explained. Over and over. If you choose not to believe clear explanations by really smart people, many of them Republicans who voted for President Trump, that isn’t their fault. They can present facts but they cannot make anyone believe them. Some folks will always reject the simple explanation and prefer a complex conspiracy theory.

          3. Please, tell me…is/was Trump a Russian agent?

            Separate question…a “respected” authority recently came out reconsidering the “yellow showers” story. This story was included in a document that has been broadly discredited. Maybe, like this one-time intelligence leader/official, you believe this story?

            It’s more than “this time/last time.” It’s a legal systems that’s been turning its eye from impt matters for over 4 yrs.

            1. I suspect that the Russians are careful not to recruit agents who are so self-centered that their loyalty and judgment cannot be relied on. They can gain the same advantages through “useful fools” who can be counted on to do their handlers’ bidding without even realizing that they are being used. Much of the US intellegence community puts Trump in that class.

              I assume that the “document” you refer to is the so-called “Steele Dossier,” which is not a document, but a collection of 16 memos containing unevaluated intellegence. Some of the information in the memos has been verified (for example, that there were a significant number of high-level contacts between the Trump Campaign and representatives of the Russian Federation). A lesser amount has been definitely disproven. Most of the allegations in the memos remain unconfirmed—neither proven nor disproven. That is exactly what one should expect from raw unevaluated intellegence; somebody definitely said it happened, but they may not be reliable.

              The Moscow Ritz Carlton “golden rain” story is in that category. It sounds implausible for a germaphobe, but Michael Cohen claims that he organized similar events for Trump in Las Vegas. I would require more evidence before I would say I believe the story.

              I do agree that the legal system has been turning its eye from important matters for four years. Perhaps things will change now that the chief suspect no longer controls the Justice Department.

            2. Walked around, by and through the question with verbose “explanations,” but can’t/won’t answer the “agent” question.

              It was a description you’ve associated with the former president in the past. Sacrificing that belief now?

              Simple, Y or N.

            3. I’ll answer your question if you’ll answer mine: Do you believe that Joe Biden was duly elected as President of the United States in a free and fair election?

            4. I have never called Donald Trump a Russian agent. I have said that his 2016 campaign solicited Russian assistance, benefitted from Russian assistance, and led him to repeatedly support Russia against the American intelligence community while he was President. That shows that he was a useful fool, but it does not prove that he was a Russian agent as such. I simply do not know whether he was following orders or just acting stupid. So, I can’t provide a “y or n” answer.

  7. Woke or smoke? We just found there wasn’t enough content that was interesting. We’ve got Disney+ and Netflix and how is Apple competing with either company’s content?

    The bottom line is that these companies specialise in digital media content and for Apple it is just one of their sidelines, or is that sideshows?

    Apple will pour more money into this and unless they are prepared to devote tens of millions per year it will fall by the wayside. Let’s face it Apple makes hardware and operating systems and that’s what they should stick to.

    1. If Apple isn’t playing the long game with Apple TV+, then they will certainly lose. But if they are playing the long game, and they stick with it, they’ve got a reasonable chance. But they need some of the “pirate” thinking that gave us first the Lisa and then the Mac. I don’t see that in their current lineup.

  8. I hate to say it but Apple TV+ has been a minus in the content department. I’ve had it for free for a while but barely touched it. All of the things I want to watch are found elsewhere. Apple has billions to spend and needs more compelling content – so says Captain Obvious.

      1. Could it have anything to do with the mindset of one that valued the square peg/round hole thinking and the other advocates the group-think of the culture?

        One was a rebel and embraced that paradigm. The other involves status-quo has-been’s in new productions. Say hello to the true rebel; Jennifer Anniston, again, again again…or, Reese Witherspoon, or others that feel like known-quantity fillers.

        Wealthiest company in the World creating mostly pap…hard to compute.

Reader Feedback

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