New York Post:
Apple’s discussions with ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox initially foundered over the tech giant’s desire to offer on the soon-to-launch service local live TV feeds streamed on any Apple device, sources said.
But networks don’t control affiliate feeds. So Apple CEO Tim Cook’s team asked the networks to obtain those rights — instead of having Apple chase those rights around the country itself.
Now, it seems, Cook’s strategy is paying off, sources said.
The networks are close to having the right to negotiate with Apple on behalf of their affiliates, the sources added.
Those affiliate groups, which include Tribune and Sinclair, are being told by the networks that if they opt in and offer their feeds, they will be able to share in the added revenue the Apple streaming product will produce, sources tell The Post.
Hard to judge the veracity of this story. The New York Post is not typically a source for tech news. But this has a feel of truth to it. If nothing else, the mechanics of this deal make sense and are worth understanding.
A while back, Barry Diller’s Aereo built out an antenna farm, designed to grab over-the-air broadcast signals from local network affiliates, then rebroadcast those signals over the net as part of the Aereo paid service. Aereo got sued, ended up going out of business.
According to the Post, Apple is stepping in to do the job that Aereo could not. Rather than grabbing the signal behind the networks’ collective backs, it seems Apple is negotiating with the networks to get the rights to broadcast affiliate feeds. At the same time, the networks are negotiating with their respective affiliates to secure the right to negotiate with Apple on their behalf.
Obstacles remain, but I like this story.
Dave, I wonder about the future of commercial-based television. I know a lot of adults and a lot of teenagers who no longer watch network TV except for sports. I agree with you that this is a good move for Apple if true. But it’s going to be interesting moving forward to see how the networks deal with competition from essentially Netflix, Hulu, and YouTube. I’m so used to NetFlix and YouTube that I now find commercials almost intolerable.
“Rather than grabbing the signal behind the networks’ collective backs…”
This statement fundamentally misses the fact that OTA broadcasts are done on the airwaves owned by the public. They are treading on our territory when they do it. This is why they went with cable. So they could charge a toll for their broadcasts on their customers. All the shenanigans they go through to prevent people from benefitting from what is rightly theirs, cable cards, monopolistic control of access to programming through agreements with cities that prevents competition, Verizon refusing the build out fiber unless they get a monopoly on the area, it’s all designed to avoid the airwaves the public owns.
Courts ignored the fact that Aero was simply renting an antenna to their customers and using the Internet to deliver that content that the users had a right to without payment (payment being watching the ads).
But courts rarely rule in favor of our rights when billionaires are not the beneficiaries.
So, they’re going to bundle in the same crap as cable?
The whole reason I’d go with an OTT service is because I don’t want to subscribe to local channels. I can get them free with an antenna. Local networks are one of the biggest reasons cable fees have increased so fast the past 10 years.
I don’t typically consider the NY Post a source for news, period.
Not everyone can get reception of all their local stations via antenna, so the service has some merits.
I personally don’t have a problem with ad-supported TV/streams if it is something I am not paying for. That’s why I’m willing to pay for Netflix or HBO, but I won’t pay for Hulu and I’m willing to sit through ads on the ABC or CWTV apps. Hulu, to me, is especially egregious since they have ads whether you pay or not. (I don’t know if they have changed to just ads about other Hulu shows if you pay, though. Those I’m okay with at the beginning or end of a show. But I don’t need them in the middle nor do I need to see an ad for laundry soap when I’m paying for service.)
Wow – Hulu sticks in ads even if you pay? I didn’t know that. I pay for NetFlix and watch my Star Trek and IT Crowd episodes ad-free. PS – IT Crowd is a funny, funny show.
The devil’s in the details, I guess. With cable, you’re required to buy the local channels even if you don’t want to. If Apple can’t negotiate unbundling, then there’s no reason to switch from cable.
To be fair the Hulu ads are 1-2 ads, not the block of 8+ you get on the broadcast show. If you want to watch current shows (i.e. shows during their current season) it’s a much better option than cable/OTA for seeing fewer ads. Yes, you pay and get a few ads – but you get things while they are new. I’d love the option to pay more (say $20 vs $8) and get no ads.
Before someone chimes in that the Netflix rebroadcasts of shows don’t have ads… and they’re not current but a season or more behind.
if only we knew someone who could give a yep/nope confirmation on these rumors. or any rumor, really.
It is true Netflix is a season or so behind. However, there is so much to watch, I’m generally fine with that. I’ve got about 400 things in my to-be-watched list. (Organizing that is a pain in the ass; I Preallyhave forgotten most of what is in the list 🙂 ) I have supplemented by purchasing a current season of something via iTunes (Doctor Who, as one example).
I do hope the local channels are optional. My antenna gets about 40 channels which I’m fine with. Although, if the local channel option gives me the ability to see past shows and seasons of things not available on Netflix and Amazon Prime, that might be worthwhile.
Whatever the case, I’m looking forward to seeing what Apple can do and if they can kick it gallup a notch from what Dish’s SlingTV service does.
Yeah, having enough to watch isn’t the issue for most of us, I think. I just wanted to point out that Hulu gives you current shows so if you want to watch something that it has and do that while the show is new (so you can avoid spoilers, talk about it with people, whatever), then Hulu’s a fine choice and the ads aren’t anywhere close to what they are on the live showing of the, er, show.
I imagine the local channels are part of it because it simplifies the experience for most people. Yes, YOU are fine with getting local channels OTA, but it probably means that you have to move from the Antenna input to the Apple TV once, back and forth. If Apple can provide everything someone wants and simplify the experience, that’s a good thing for many people.
First, it means that the user never has to switch inputs. Second (and more importantly) it means that Apple can give me a combined listing of programs. No idea if they will, but I’d love to see a UI like the old Boxee UI – I find a program I want and it shows me the various ways to watch it. So, if I want to see, say, NCIS, having the local channel in there means it can show me that NCIS is on CBS tonight at 9pm, Hulu starting tomorrow, etc.