Apple reportedly trying to fill Apple TV+ with content back catalog

GeorgeBMac said:

Apple thinking it can become a serious player in the streaming market with only new and original content is based on hubris rather than reality.

In the early days of TV families gathered around the TV watching new and original content -- such as the variety shows, westerns, sitcoms, etc.  But then, for the most part, that's all that was available.  And, after dark, for the family, except for reading a book, that's all there was to do anyway.

But now we have 70 years of movies and TV content available to stream -- along with a plethora of other options provided by gaming, social media and the like.

Apple can't roll back that clock.

Not only has time moved on, but Apple is an inexperienced player trying to compete with a multitude of highly polished organizations who are very good at what they do.

The whole thing sounds like it is poorly thought out to me.

If Apple wants to be competitive in media, it needs to invest some of that excess cash in its business -- maybe by buying one of those major players or acquiring a stable of existing content -- rather than handing it out like candy to their stockholders.

Seems to me that the article you’re responding to is saying they’re doing exactly what you’re telling them to do.

It may have been the plan all along, start small and build slowly to ensure scalability and that they could start with a low price and flexibility.

Had it not been for the virus, Apple would likely have had more original content available by now and looking ahead, the content that will be available by year's end will be greatly diminished. 

As such, it's logical that Apple is seeking ways to build out its content. Really, right now, there is only one way to do that, namely acquire content that had been created pre-virus. 

The choice right now is between having such a dearth of content that Apple will have a hard time maintaining subscribers once the annual free subscriptions run out or trying to fill out the line-up with some existing third-party content, albeit at the expense of the overall quality of the offerings. Neither option is as good as Apple's original plan, namely develop as much quality content as possible and build it out during the first year to offer up enough of it to justify a modest monthly cost. 

The thing is, this virus is - we can only hope - a once-in-a-century occurance that Apple certainly can't be blamed for not anticipating. Had AppleTV+ been launched a year earlier, it would look quite different and I suspect we'd be having a differrent conversation.

GeorgeBMac said:

Apple thinking it can become a serious player in the streaming market with only new and original content is based on hubris rather than reality.

In the early days of TV families gathered around the TV watching new and original content -- such as the variety shows, westerns, sitcoms, etc.  But then, for the most part, that's all that was available.  And, after dark, for the family, except for reading a book, that's all there was to do anyway.

But now we have 70 years of movies and TV content available to stream -- along with a plethora of other options provided by gaming, social media and the like.

Apple can't roll back that clock.

Not only has time moved on, but Apple is an inexperienced player trying to compete with a multitude of highly polished organizations who are very good at what they do.

The whole thing sounds like it is poorly thought out to me.

If Apple wants to be competitive in media, it needs to invest some of that excess cash in its business -- maybe by buying one of those major players or acquiring a stable of existing content -- rather than handing it out like candy to their stockholders.

Just some perspective

Studio Entertainment 

Disney's Studio Entertainment segment is engaged in motion picture production and distribution through the Walt Disney Pictures, Twentieth Century Fox, Marvel, Lucasfilm, Pixar, and other companies. The segment also produces and distributes live entertainment and music, among other activities. Revenue comes from licensing motion pictures to theaters; sale of motion pictures in DVD, Blu-ray, and other formats; and licensing fees, stage play ticket sales, and post-production services.

Studio Entertainment's revenue grew 10.6% during FY 2019 to $11.1 billion, comprising about 16% of both Disney's total revenue and operating income. The segment's operating income fell 10.6% to $2.7 billion in FY 2019.

Geven how profitable Apple is, you can forgive them for not running out and blowing "excess cash" on a business that doesn't earn anywhere near the margins that they currently enjoy for services and devices. Current leaders in streaming aren't actually generating piles of cash.

Compared to Netflix;

Netflix's Financials 

Netflix has posted negative cash flow since 2011 due largely to the company's strategy of spending heavily to finance growth, including the production of original entertainment. Despite that negative cash flow, Netflix has seen significant gains to its net income and revenue in recent years. For the fiscal year 2019, annual net income was $1.9 billion, up 54.1% year-over-year (YOY).

In 2019, Netflix reported revenue of $20.2 billion, up 27.6% YOY. Like net income, Netflix's revenue has grown at an impressive clip. Since 2015, for instance, revenue has nearly tripled and net income has grown by more than 14 times.

Apple's revenues from 2019; $260 B and net profit, $55.3 B

It suggests that Apple doesn't need to rush into any large M&A, but can grow its studio and media assets organically, while licensing content.

They should buy HBO. Or Disney. Or Both. Buy something. I will not subscribe to more than 2 (maybe 3) streaming services.