William Gallagher
Figures for television and online advertising show Apple typically spending around half as much on promoting Apple TV+ as on the iPhone.
According to the New York Times, Apple's marketing of Apple TV+ has been "muted" compared to how Disney+ is being promoted. While there are no details for Disney's spending, on figures available for September and October, Apple spent around twice as much advertising the iPhone than it did Apple TV+.
In September, Apple reportedly spent $28.6 million on iPhone television ads, compared to $14.9 million for Apple TV+
As might be expected, that figure went up in October as the service's November 1 launch date approached, but the proportions were approximately the same. In October, Apple spent $19.9 million advertising Apple TV+ on television, but it spent $38.6 million on iPhone adds.
The figures are closer for online ad spending and in September, Apple TV+ promotions actually cost more. Apple paid an estimated $3.8 million for online Apple TV+ ads, compared to $2.4 million for iPhone ones.
However, in October, online iPhone ads cost Apple $2.3 million, while it is believed to have spent $1.7 million on Apple TV+ ones.
The New York Times quotes analyst Dan Rayburn of business consulting firm Frost & Sullivan, saying that Apple is right to hold back on its advertising.
"Consumers are just drowning in content right now," he told the Times, "and all of these services are competing for our time. But they're all approaching the market differently. This isn't some race for Apple. It's a slow roll."
However, analyst Daniel Ives of Wedbush Securities told the NYT that he believes the Apple TV+ marketing has been unusually "aggressive" for Apple.
"This is a pivotal juncture for Apple to be successful," he said. "They cannot trip over their shoelace. They were late to the game, they've underinvested in content, and they have a lot of room to make up."
The New York Times report was first spotted by 9to5mac.
Andrew Orr
Amber Neely
Christine McKee
AppleInsider Staff
37 Comments
Of course they spent twice as much on the iPhone as on AppleTV+. The iPhone took in $142 billion this past fiscal. At $60 per year, it would take 2.3 billion TV+ subscriptions to equal that revenue. That's basically the number of households on the planet. AppleTV+ revenue will NEVER equal iPhone revenue. One could argue that they've already spent too much promoting AppleTV+ based on the potential revenue stream.
Nielsen says there's about 120 million TV homes in the U.S. If Apple got 20% of them, which would be huge, that's 24 million homes = $1.4 billion once everyone starts paying the full $60 per year. AppleTV+ is not there to make a lot of money. It's to keep people in the Apple eco-system. IMO, the only thing it has going for it is that it's only $5 a month which might get over the usual objection of "I don't want another subscription bill every month".
Up until recently, as a cord-cutter, I've had it pretty good. Netflix and Amazon Prime together provided me with plenty of good stuff to watch, and I got the sports I wanted from broadcast TV (with a TiVo). Now the services are splintering, with content from Netflix going to other platforms. I guess this sort of makes sense from a business perspective, and as long as I don't have to watch commercials, I'm pretty happy. However, if feel like the last couple of years are probably going to be remembered as the golden age for good content at a good price.