Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple In Talks To Bring $0.99 TV Rentals To iTunes

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the I'd-buy-that-for-a-dollar dept.

Television 274

An anonymous reader writes "On September first, Apple will reportedly announce a new iPod Touch with a front facing camera, a refreshed Apple TV, and more interestingly, the arrival of $0.99 TV episode rentals on iTunes."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Subscription service (4, Insightful)

odies (1869886) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374500)

$0.99 is way too much for a single episode rental. With the same price you can buy the whole season from store and get a physical product with extras too.

Why not a subscription based service like Spotify, but for TV episodes? I would gladly pay $10 a month if I could stream any tv show and episode I wanted to. I already do for Spotify and seriously, I haven't felt the need to get mp3's since I started using it because frankly, it's just so convenient and easy. Hell, you can even offer an ad-based service too. Just have it huge library, don't delete old episodes or shows and add the new episodes there right after or when they're showing on TV.

Re:Subscription service (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33374552)

$0.99 is way too much for a single episode rental. With the same price you can buy the whole season from store and get a physical product with extras too.

I call bullshit. Where can you buy entire seasons of TV shows on DVD for $0.99? Name the store.

Re:Subscription service (2, Insightful)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374580)

$1 an episode x 20 episodes = $20 ...About half or three-quarters of the normal price, right?

So for the discount, you don't get to keep the product.

Re:Subscription service (2, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374912)

Depends on the show really. Star Trek TNG was over $100 per season when it first came out, and it's still at $50+ new on Amazon. Compared to that, these are cheap. On the other hand, Charmed runs about $18-25 for a season on Amazon, and I've seen them in Wal-mart for $15 per season. Compared that that, this isn't so great.

Now personally, I'd expect a discount for a digital only version where there are no packaging, discs to press, inventory to track, or items to ship to a store. That's for a digital copy I get to keep. If it's a rental only? I'd expect a (significant) further discount again. IMHO, for digital downloads, a whole season of a TV show should be around $10 to buy as a whole - $5 to rent. If doing it by single episodes I'd expect $1 or less to buy and $0.50 or less to rent.

Re:Subscription service (4, Insightful)

spazdor (902907) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375064)

If it's a rental only? I'd expect a (significant) further discount again

For a digital copy I don't even get to keep, well, I'd expect not to have to pay. The "watch this but don't keep a copy" model has been ad-supported on aerial TV for decades, and on YouTube for the better part of one. What makes them think they deserve any customers by stepping back onto a pay-per-play system? And isn't this the kind of shit that DRM alarmists were diligently warning everyone about back in 2003?

Re:Subscription service (0)

WCguru42 (1268530) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375252)

The "watch this but don't keep a copy" model has been ad-supported on aerial TV for decades, and on YouTube for the better part of one

And the iTunes tv episode rental would supposedly not have any commercials, thus defeating the ad supported revenue model.

Re:Subscription service (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375284)

Well, that requires them to have obnoxious disruptive ads. Some of us would be willing to pay to get rid of those ads, today you don't really get that option. Or you do on torrents but no ads and no pay means no income for those who made it. I welcome the possibility to pay my way out of ads, it's a choice I think I like. If it really turns out that I'm wrong, that I value it less than the advertisers so be it. Then it's my choice to watch the ad edition, which I'm quite sure will remain available...

Re:Subscription service (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375786)

And isn't this the kind of shit that DRM alarmists were diligently warning everyone about back in 2003?

I think you mean it's the kind of shit that DRM apologists were claiming was the incredible creation of new market models enabled by DRM.

Re:Subscription service (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 3 years ago | (#33376020)

Don't forget, with the download you get lower resolution, no bonus features, you can't lend it to a friend, storage fails eventually and you'll kill your bandwidth cap restoring.

Re:Subscription service (2, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374992)

>>>$1 an episode x 20 episodes = $20 ...About half or three-quarters of the normal price, right?

Unless you later sell the used DVD on ebay for $20 (~$40-20 == about $20 total cost of ownership), in which case there's no savings whatsoever to rent from Apple. Plus with a DVD set you can watch it now, then share it with friends at the next party, then watch it again next year or five or ten years from now.

Buying ends-up being cheaper than renting.

Re:Subscription service (1)

click2005 (921437) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374584)

Ebay or anywhere that sells second hand DVDs for a reasonable price.

Re:Subscription service (4, Informative)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374628)

I call bullshit. Where can you buy entire seasons of TV shows on DVD for $0.99? Name the store.

Netflix.

With a two to three-day turnaround time, I can get a dozen DVDs a month of TV shows (entire seasons' worth) for the basic Netflix subscription. If I step up the subscription, I can have several dozen DVDs come through my house, which I can then load on to my iPod Touch.

Plus, I can watch as many of the online TV seasons as I want. It comes to much, much, much less than $0.99 per episode.

Re:Subscription service (2, Interesting)

Kjella (173770) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375114)

Nice, but quite probably illegal as making permanent copies of a rental goes far outside normal fair use and is a direct replacement for a dvd sale. You may call it timeshifting but I doubt the courts would look on it the same way they did with the VHS, after all you can keep your DVD longer or return it and get it later to timeshift. And if you're in the US you're breaking the DMCA etc. too, fair use or not.

Now, it's almost impossible to discover and thus ever prosecute but legally it's pretty much the same as torrents and torrents you can get for free. Of course they're not legal, but again so I doubt is yours. So if you don't care about that you can get them cheaper and if you do care then no, I doubt you get that for $0.99/season anywhere.

Re:Subscription service (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375138)

Your math is off.

A 3-disc queue costs $20. You can theoretically get up to 22 discs a month (I have the calculation around here somewhere; not having sunday delivery in either direction really slows things down), so that's about $1/disc.

A disc has up to 5 episodes of an hour show on it, up to 6 of a half-hour show (I haven't seen more; some series may be more generous). So a whole season of 22-26 episodes will be 4-6 discs, or $4-6 of your subscription value.

But Apple wants you to give them $22-26 for it, or 266-550% more than Netflix will charge you.

Re:Subscription service (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33375418)

Your math doesn't include the crapton of stuff available on instant watch. You can stream 720p to your TV set with a XBox 360 or similar and it's "so simple a caveman could do it". My 9 year old daughter is very adept and finding kids shows and firing them up. I've gotten whole seasons of shows for nothing extra.

Re:Subscription service (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375484)

There is that, but I don't have my Roku yet (it's in the mail; woot.com had them for like $60 the other day) so I don't know what TV shows netflix does have; they don't have instant viewing on every item in stock. They should, but they don't.

Re:Subscription service (1)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375924)

I agree with your math and don't plan on using Apple's service, but it's not really a very good comparison. Apple is talking about current shows, on TV now, current season. Netflix only offers shows that have been released on DVD (and a very few instant shows), a year later than they will be on Apple's service. If Apple were only renting TV shows that were already out on DVD, they'd be charging much less.

Re:Subscription service (4, Insightful)

Beardydog (716221) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374630)

It's way too much for any type of copy. TV shows, compared to songs, are usually much more disposable. The Colbert Report is an extreme example. It comes on, I watch it, and I have no desire to ever watch that episode again. I watch backcatalogs on Netflix of a lot of things, but I've never h ad any desire to own them before getting streaming access. And yet Apple sells episodes ofthe ColbertReport for 2 dollars, if I recall correctly.

There are exceptions, and I can see people buying episodes of a Firefly, or a Gilmore Girls ( embarassing confessiion ) for two dollars, if itcomeswith guaranteed future redownloads afterdrive failures and such. But the vastmajority of TV shows are far too ephemeral. Even the Sopranos, whichI greatly enjoyed... It was fun. It's over now. I'll never watch it again.

Re:Subscription service (1)

adamstew (909658) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374768)

You can get a "multi-pass" to both the daily show and/or the colbert report from iTunes. It's $9.99 (for either show) and you get the most recently aired episode, plus the next 15 episodes when they are made available. It's one month's worth of full production, a total of 16 episodes, for $10. This comes out to $0.63 per episode. And I get to keep the ones I want forever and ever.

I do agree though... $0.99 for a rental of a TV show is bull. It should be more like $0.50.

Re:Subscription service (1)

Sancho (17056) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375722)

I think it could be fine for catching up on shows you've missed, assuming the shows come to rental the day after they air. Hulu's usually a week behind. Of course, DVRs completely screw up the picture and make things like "catching up" almost pointless.

Apple needs to be dealing in volume. $10 for an entire 22 episode season rental, where the timer is per episode and doesn't start until you begin watching it. That way they get better revenue (people paying for entire seasons instead of individual episodes) and they aren't completely ripping you off on the price. Better still, give an option to pay the difference and buy the season if you decide that you like the show. They'd probably get more sales that way, as consumers already have a sunk cost.

Re:Subscription service (1)

lymond01 (314120) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375564)

Let's see, in my TV watching season, my family watches two TV shows. So that's $2/week or $8/month. Assuming these episodes are HD, that's a bit cheaper than $80/month Xfinity for 300 channels I never watch. If I wanted to plan my movies (I don't) I'd add a $10 netflix subscription...and then just stream on demand netflix. So that's all the TV I need for $18/month.

Re:Subscription service (1)

awc (1656865) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375568)

I know a place where I can get TV shows for free ... torrents ftw

Re:Subscription service (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33374562)

$0.99 rentals? I dont pay that much to buy my tv.

I bittorrent whatever the hell I want then buy it when it reaches
$0.99 or less per episode on Ebay (2nd hand preferably).

Why would anyone be stupid enough to pay $0.99 to 'borrow' something for a while?

Re:Subscription service (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33374790)

Why would anyone be stupid enough to pay $0.99 to 'borrow' something for a while?

Not all of us have entitlement complexes or think that just because you can get something for nothing makes it morally right to do so.

Cable or satellite runs at least $10 a month for just the basic channels. If you're only interested in watching a few shows, the rental model isn't terribly bad. If the rental model allowed for the release of new episodes on the same day as the original television air date, is their really any reason not to pay a dollar to watch it?

Re:Subscription service (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33374902)

Yes and not all of us are stupid or gullible enough to think that something is worth what a company with a history of ripping people off is charging.

Cable/Sat TV around here is about $10 per month then add another $10 for STB rental, another $10 for the phone line.

If the rental model allowed for the release of new episodes on the same day as the original television air date, is their really any reason not to pay a dollar to watch it?

Yes. When I can get it for free and I feel its not even worth $1 to buy I'll never pay $0.99 to have use of a few 1s and 0s for a while.

Re:Subscription service (2, Interesting)

alvinrod (889928) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375762)

Yes and not all of us are stupid or gullible enough to think that something is worth what a company with a history of ripping people off is charging.

Then don't buy it. No one is forcing you to consume that content.

Cable/Sat TV around here is about $10 per month then add another $10 for STB rental, another $10 for the phone line.

I don't know what the local cable company charges for basic cable or phone around here since I don't purchase either or really have any desire to do so. There're really only a few shows that I'm interested in watching, and most of them aren't on basic cable anyhow. I already own the ones I'd ever care to watch more than once, and Hulu usually allows me to satisfy my curiosity for anything I might be interested in, so I don't know if the rental model applies to me either.

Yes. When I can get it for free and I feel its not even worth $1 to buy I'll never pay $0.99 to have use of a few 1s and 0s for a while.

If everyone felt that way, there wouldn't be as many 1s and 0s for you to use for a while. Someone has to pay and right now advertisers cover the cost to get eyeballs in front of a TV. If there aren't any eyeballs in front of that TV and no one will pay to rent or buy the program, it's not going to get made. You might look at it as paying for some bits, but I look at it as an hour's worth of entertainment. Compared to most things, a dollar isn't unreasonable. Just because it costs next to nothing to duplicate those bits doesn't mean that it took no effort to create what those bits represent.

I imagine that a sizable portion of the /. crowd makes a living from software development. Everything that these people make can be had at no cost, but if everyone were to do that, there'd be a lot of people out of the job. I'm not going to claim to be some kind of saint because I pirated a shit load of music and other stuff back in the day, but now that I have a job and can afford music, books, movies, etc. Even today I'll use some non-legitimate source for content if I can't find a legal avenue to access it, but I honestly don't mind paying for something that I get enjoyment from.

I'm one of those people who think that musicians can survive without record sales because they can fall back on live performances. Hell, the RIAA takes most of the money from record sales for even the most highly successful artists so artists must be making the money elsewhere. I don't see a similar situation for television shows, however. Maybe toys and action figures?

I don't want to call you an asshole or something like that, but I can't really understand your point of view. When I was young and didn't have much for disposable income I probably didn't differ much, but I just spent enough money at a local bar that I could have otherwise spent to rent a season worth of episodes of a TV show I like. If it's not an issue of money or availability, what's stopping you from parting with few dollars to enjoy yourself?

Re:Subscription service (1)

LordArgon (1683588) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374972)

Because for a lot of TV shows, you can get the same thing for free via Hulu (or the network's website)?

The only reason to e-rent TV shows is if you have little self-control and/or lots of disposable income. Most are online for free (legitimately) within a week. For the odd one out, waiting for Netflix to get it really isn't that bad, IMO.

Re:Subscription service (1, Flamebait)

HerculesMO (693085) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374586)

Agreed 100%. Apple won't do a subscription model because it's not as lucrative in conjunction with their iPod/Phone/Pad sales. Want to watch an episode on your iPod? Rent it, $.99. Want to watch it again on your iPad? Rent it again.

I think Apple is a company designed to take advantage of stupid consumers, and this is another shot in that direction. Fanboys as your revenue stream is fun, but there are a hell of a lot of them so Apple's not in any danger now.

That's why they can screw content authors by dictating terms on e-Books and music, and give you less choice but make it appear "cool".

Re:Subscription service (0)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374700)

>>>I think Apple is a company designed to take advantage of stupid consumers,

Quick! Apple fanboys: Mod him down! Mod him down!

/end sarcasm

Actually I agree with you but it isn't just Apple. Almost all megacorps are designed to take advantage of consumers. There are so many deals in the world that make no logical sense when you examine them under a microscope. Like paying ~$80 for cable television when you can get a lot of the channels (abc,cbs,nbc,fox,cw,ion,movie channel) for free. Or buy on DVD. Or trading in a car you paid $20,000 to buy and only get $5,000 used, thereby losing a huge chunk of money. Or..... well I could go on forever. Companies like to rip us off, and we make it so easy for them to do.

Wait a second (1)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374818)

I'm an apple customer -- we have quite a few macs, ipods, even two ipads -- but I won't watch TV for free, much less for .99/show. So let's not paint with too broad a brush, shall we?

Re:Wait a second (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375130)

>>>I won't watch TV for free, much less for .99/show

Why not? Don't you like a good drama like CSI? Or farout story like Fringe? Or medical show like House? ----- Not that it really matters: My point was not about liking these shows..... my point was that it's ridiculous how many Americans pay $80/month to see these shows when you can see them for free.

Re:Wait a second (4, Insightful)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375502)

my point was that it's ridiculous how many Americans pay $80/month to see these shows when you can see them for free.

There are millions (and I mean millions) of cable subscribers in apartment building that cannot have 'free' TV of any quality. Rabbit ears != decent reception in most urban areas (I can't speak for suburban areas). On top of that there are condominiums and home owner associations that ban visible antennae. Free isn't an option for everyone.

Re:Subscription service (3, Insightful)

Dayze!Confused (717774) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374600)

I was doing the math on this too and it's insane, especially for rental, to have it be $0.99. If we assume only 2 hours a day at 30 minutes per episode, that's four episodes a day. Times 30 days in a month equals 120 episodes, or $118.80. While it may be convenient for one or two episodes a month that you missed on your cable subscription, it is insanely expensive to think about.

Re:Subscription service (2, Insightful)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375442)

You watch too much TV.

My list: Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Lie to Me. That's three hours a week. MM and BB I buy through iTunes so that they're waiting for me to watch at a convenient time (I don't get AMC) and I watch Lie to Me on Fox.com for free. I'd probably do the same with BB and MM if they offered high quality streaming versions, but last I checked, they don't. My total is about $40/year with zero broadcast TV beyond the occasional news show or sporting event.

When I have some spare time, I've been known to watch Daily Show/Colbert, but the streaming versions are fine for me. All said and done, I think I spend no more than 4 hours a week on a bad week in front of any form of TV entertainment, usually more like two. Two hours a day? Forget about $120/mo; my time is worth more to me.

Re:Subscription service (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375452)

Well, I assume they'd be smart enough to have a season pass the way $0.99 songs have albums, and the price of the album is not $0.99 * number of songs. I'm guessing the $0.99 is exactly for those one episode customers. Alas, I expect this won't be available here as no TV, movies or anything of the sort is available over iTunes here. Just music...

Re:Subscription service (1)

Sancho (17056) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375854)

Worse, really, is if 22 minutes shows cost the same as 44 minute shows.

That said, 2 hours a day sounds like a lot. I pay about $60/mo total for my cable TV, but I bet I watch 6 hours per week. If Apple gets all of the shows I watch, rental prices would be worth it even if it's $0.99 across the board. If it's anything less for 22 minute shows, it's an even bigger win. Drop cable and save at least $12/mo? Definitely.

Re:Subscription service (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 3 years ago | (#33376006)

Plus, my cable company already give the last 2 weeks of all the popular show "On Demand" for free. Its one of the things that really makes cable better than satellite. Satellite will never be able to offer on demand programming, and this is one of the way cable stays ahead. I don't think iTunes will be able to rent that many episodes at that price. At 24 episodes a season, that's $24. It costs about $50 a season even for the hour long shows. So it really doesn't make sense to pay $24 and own nothing in the end, when you could pay a little more and own a physical disk. There's so many ways to watch this stuff for free (on demand, network website, Hulu) that I don't see why anybody would pay for a rental.

Re:Subscription service (2, Insightful)

flitty (981864) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374656)

Actually, I'd pay $.99 for most Premium Cable Channel shows. Almost everything else I'll wait for the DVD release.

Re:Subscription service (3, Insightful)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374658)

With the same price you can buy the whole season from store and get a physical product with extras too.

I don't think I've bought a non-clearance DVD of a TV season and averaged $.99 per ep.

That's beside the point, though. Maybe you're paying that 99 cents because you've never seen the show before and you're just curious. Or maybe you're paying that because you're really into a show and happened to miss one ep.

It's not a matter of cost, it's a matter of value. With all due respect, any geek or nerd should understand this. When have you ever heard one say: "I saved money by not upgrading my 2x CD burner. All I have to do is wait longer!"

Re:Subscription service (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374934)

>>>I don't think I've bought a non-clearance DVD of a TV season and averaged $.99 per ep.

As with anything it depends what you buy. I just got Hercules season set for $20 or about $1 per episode. Star Trek still costs around $50 or about 2 dollars per episode..... but even then it's still a good deal because you can watch it as many times as you want over the next 10-20 years time. If you watched it four times, you've effectively reduced the cost to 50 cents

And if you get sick of the show, you can sell it on ebay for about $25.... further reducing your episode cost. It's almost always cheaper to buy then rent.

Re:Subscription service (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375182)

As with anything it depends what you buy. I just got Hercules season set for $20 or about $1 per episode. Star Trek still costs around $50 or about 2 dollars per episode..... but even then it's still a good deal because you can watch it as many times as you want over the next 10-20 years time. If you watched it four times, you've effectively reduced the cost to 50 cents

And if you get sick of the show, you can sell it on ebay for about $25.... further reducing your episode cost. It's almost always cheaper to buy then rent.

Yes, in one case, it doesn't make as much sense.

In the case of you not being so interested in the show that you want to buy the DVD, or the DVD isn't available, or it's really the one ep you want to watch, you're wasting a ton of money to catch it.

Having choices is better. Funny enough, that's a common theme on this site.

Re:Subscription service (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375408)

>>>Having choices is better.

Agreed. Unless they eventually eliminate the option to buy (which many record companies and TV studios have been trying to do for years), and you have no option but a 99 cent rental. Remember DIVX discs? We're lucky it flopped but now they have a new opportunity to force us into rental-only model.

Re:Subscription service (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375606)

Agreed. Unless they eventually eliminate the option to buy (which many record companies and TV studios have been trying to do for years)

Actually the TV and Movie industry had exactly that model for decades. It wasn't until the 80's (late 70's?) that you could purchase home movies and TV seasons on DVD is a recent thing, too. In fact, television shows on DVD have resurrected several shows.

For all the silliness these industries have put us through, it still boils down to supply and demand.

Re:Subscription service (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375754)

I don't think I've bought a non-clearance DVD of a TV season and averaged $.99 per ep.

You mean more than 99 per ep, right? Because I have a couple of hundred TV seasons and I'm sure I haven't ever paid more than 99 cents per episode.
Some else mentioned the gilmore girls - all seasons are currently available for $20 each at vendors like Barnes & Noble - that's less than 50 cents an episode.
I've bought almost all seasons of 24 and they were under $15 each at the time.
etc
etc

It's not a matter of cost, it's a matter of value

That's what the MAFIAA says... until sales fall through the floor when people actually take them at their word and realize that the value of recorded entertainment is quite low in comparison to the rest of the things in their lives (I'm talking about the massive drop in DVD sales over the last 2-3 years, especially in TV on DVD) and then the MAFIAA switches to blaming piracy.

Real competition drives prices to as near production costs as possible. Arguments about value are just rationalizations for monopolies and other market inefficiencies.

Re:Subscription service (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33374676)

A fool and his money are soon parted.

or... (2, Insightful)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374858)

In the case of broadcast television...

A fool and his time are soon parted.

At 22 episodes/season, that's a fair price (1)

msobkow (48369) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375128)

That works out to $22 for a 22 episode season, vs. over $30/season to buy box sets.

Re:At 22 episodes/season, that's a fair price (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33375768)

Or, to think of it another way, for 10 dollars, you can watch 10 episodes on iTunes for a month. At the same time, Netflix will let you watch all the episodes, as well as countless other for 10 dollars.

Of course, Netflix can have a good delay before the shows are available. If you can wait and watch seasons later, Netflix's price trounces 99 cents per episode.

Re:Subscription service (1)

minorproblem (891991) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375178)

Rules of the internet, everyone is willing to pay half of what the asking price is. To tell you the truth 0.99c an episode is pretty good for the convenience. If they released something like this in Australia i would be all over it, I find quite often i am out on site somewhere, in Western Australia. We have lots of spare time at night time, lots of spare cash because there is not heaps to do while you are working on site, and a fast internet connection. If i could easily queue up a few episodes in the morning before leaving and have them ready to watch at night i would do it. Its in the price range where people think whats a dollar anyways (probably like $1.50 for Australia anyways)

Re:Subscription service (1)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375200)

$0.99 is way too much for a single episode rental. With the same price you can buy the whole season from store and get a physical product with extras too.

Am I crazy?

I used to *buy* TV episodes off iTunes for $1 a pop... I got Lost Season 2 this way, I know for a fact.

Is the actual news here that Apple is ripping people off? Or... is this supposed to be new somehow? Maybe they just assume we have really short memories?

Re:Subscription service (1)

causality (777677) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375990)

Is the actual news here that Apple is ripping people off? Or... is this supposed to be new somehow? Maybe they just assume we have really short memories?

Why not? It works for politicians...

Re:Subscription service (1)

tool462 (677306) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375482)

I already do buy some TV shows on iTunes at the $1.99 price. The $0.99 price will probably get me to watch more shows than I do now. But neither is exactly a cheap price so I tend to only buy shows that I know I like enough to watch multiple times and aren't available through Netflix or streaming online.

A subscription model would often be a lot more appropriate, especially for shows like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. Currently I watch both of those on my computer for free on Comedy Central's site, even though it'd be a lot more comfy on my couch. But even at $0.99 an episode, I'd be looking at roughly $32 per month to watch both of those. I could get basic cable at that price. If I could subscribe to those two shows for somewhere between $5 and $10/mo I'd jump all over that.

Re:Subscription service (-1, Troll)

Lars T. (470328) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375554)

What neither you nor the other "used DVDs are cheaper" guys understand is: you may be able to buy a DVD half a year after the season ends - but you can rent the episode before the next episode airs. Have fun seeing the episode you missed a year later.

Re:Subscription service (1)

bhcompy (1877290) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375642)

Sony does it on PSN for .99-2.99 per episode, but they're also sales instead of rentals

Hmm (5, Interesting)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374568)

I don't care if people want to waste $1 per episode to watch TV.

What I will care about is when Apple starts to exclusively lock down certain shows making them impossible to get through other services like In Demand, Netflix, etc

Re:Hmm (3, Funny)

MrJones (4691) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374836)

You are being a little paranoid, that is not going to happend

Re:Hmm (5, Insightful)

Nugoo (1794744) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375430)

-1: Naive

Re:Hmm (1)

exomondo (1725132) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375590)

You are being a little paranoid, that is not going to happend

Why not? Logically it's a pretty good move for Apple and they have the means to make it happen.

Torrents? (1)

denzacar (181829) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375934)

I mean... If it's worth watching it will turn up on torrents anyway, right?

Even sooner if it isn't.

wow (5, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374590)

All the shows? From all the carriers? They all asked for exactly 99 cents? Weird! It's almost like they all got together and colluded to keep the price high or something... nah.

Re:wow (1)

melikamp (631205) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374872)

In other news, torrents from all carriers and all shows remain free, DRM free, and ad free.

Re:wow (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375156)

And log your IP address on login so the RIAA can find you.

Re:wow (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375054)

>>>They all asked for exactly 99 cents? Weird! It's almost like they all got together and colluded...

Or more likely, they simply did what I did: Looked to see what Apple's charging, and decided to match that price for my ebay sales. It isn't always collusion - sometimes it's just using your eyes.

Also:

A lot of these shows, even when owned by different studios, are negotiated by the same Actors Union. It's why actors will get a fixed price per airing of an episode, whether it's shown on Sci-Fi or FX or TNT or wherever.

Re:wow (1)

Servaas (1050156) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375858)

sometimes it's just using your eyes.

right?

I Read TFA (1)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374634)

I think this guy might be a little biased in his opinion of apple.

TV needs to be free!!! (1)

suman28 (558822) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374694)

I don't understand why anyone would pay for TV, twice. Almost everyone (atleast in the developed countries) has a TV, and already pays for it. If you miss a show today, you can catch it in just a few hours at the earliest, and a few days at the latest. Most of it is reruns, anyway. If you want to watch something, transfer it before going somewhere. Why the hell would you pay for it again?

Re:TV needs to be free!!! (3, Insightful)

icannotthinkofaname (1480543) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374898)

Why the hell would you pay for it again?

Because you have an iProduct, a dollar, and a need for instant gratification.

Re:TV needs to be free!!! (4, Insightful)

BonquiquiShiquavius (1598579) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374966)

Unless of course, they don't pay for cable. A lot of people, myself included, are tired of the cable companies bundling/pricing schemes. I only watch 4-5 shows every season...why should I pay for the hundreds I have no interest watching? I for one love the idea of renting shows online. I think the pricing is still too high, but it's a step in the right direction. Finally some real competition in TV offerings. Maybe this will force cable companies to offer plans that favour the consumer rather than the provider.

Re:TV needs to be free!!! (2, Insightful)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375166)

I cancelled my sat-tv about 2 or 3 yrs ago. been on netflix since then.

now, I only pay for shows I want and I'm not stuck with ANY bundling. yay!

I'm not ever going back to cable to sat-tv. their business model is all wet.

apples is also wrong, though. I don't blame them for trying, but a dollar for a watching of a tv show is insane! think about it: its already been 100.0% paid for via commercials on first run and even more than 100% on re-runs.

in fact, the content should be 'free' by now, after its gone thru that process. how many times are they allowed to dip into the profit pool?

THIS is why people are sick and tired of the media companies. this is why many people just give up trying to 'do the right thing' and end up at some kind of bay or something....

apple, you're always good for a chuckle, though.

Re:TV needs to be free!!! (1)

BonquiquiShiquavius (1598579) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375336)

Getting away from the cable companies in America is already pretty easy - between netflix and hulu, you're pretty much covered. Unfortunately, these services are only available in the US. Netflix apparently is coming to Canada, but without the streaming service, which is all I really want from them.

Re:TV needs to be free!!! (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375018)

My DVR failed. not epically but it went out with a CLICK WHIRRRR CLICK WHIRRRRRR of hdd failure. Even if this was my box and I wasn't renting from the cableco, it still meant i fucking missed mythbusters. >:(

Really? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33374860)

$0.99 for as little as 20 minutes of TV? Talk about insane pricing. I can go to Redbox and pick up a 180 minute movie for $1 to occupy my time. Hell you can go to Hulu and watch a good majority of recent TV free. Netflix only costs $9/month and has lots of quality streaming TV available for the same price as 9 episodes (180 minutes) of iTunes.

To me this looks like its priced as into an very infrequent purchase to those without a DVR.

I wish that Apple actually wanted to end DRM... (2, Interesting)

Qubit (100461) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374874)

Here's a quote from something Jobs said [apple.com] , but with s/music/media/.

Perhaps those unhappy with the current situation should redirect their energies towards persuading the media companies to sell their media DRM-free....Convincing them to license their media to Apple and others DRM-free will create a truly interoperable media marketplace. Apple will embrace this wholeheartedly.

Like any big company, I think that Apple will run with a plan if it can make them money. Unfortunately, Apple doesn't have the power to get big media to distribute their content DRM-free. (And even if Apple could, would they bother?)

Re:I wish that Apple actually wanted to end DRM... (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374998)

Why bother going DRM-free?

because paying developers to keep up with new DRM requirements and patching fixes with DRM holes costs money.

Bottom line business decision. Making users happy would be just a fringe benefit.

Apparently they have never heard of netflix (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#33374956)

Netflix, all the streaming you want(if you can tolerate the drm) for $10 and dvds in the mail. I will have watched all of dexter season 4 in 1 week. That means I paid about $5 for the whole shebang as I pay around $20 a month for my 3 disc plan. Thus that is the price I am willing to pay. At ~12 episodes that works out to ~$0.42, less than half what they are suggesting. Mind you this is a Showtime show, a normal cable show might be worth half of that.

Re:Apparently they have never heard of netflix (5, Insightful)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375056)

They've heard of Netflix. And if they are charging more per unit viewed than Netflix, they can return more to the copyright holder than Netflix can, which gives the copyright holder a reason to prefer them over Netflix.

So, if people are willing to pay for this, expect more shows to not be available for Netflix streaming, and to be available only on this or similar pay-per-view systems. Or, perhaps, to be delayed in getting to Netflix and similar services for a period, where they are available on pay-per-view systems like this, and then later move to Netflix.

Re:Apparently they have never heard of netflix (1)

jmrives (1019046) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375948)

This seems to be the case with Netflix already. The watch on demand TV episodes seem to come available after the season is over. For me, this is no big deal. I just watch shows time shifted. I also catch up on older ones that I never saw because I haven't watched broadcasted television in a long time.

Re:Apparently they have never heard of netflix (1)

Teckla (630646) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375146)

It's too bad the Netflix streaming selection is so limited.

Re:Apparently they have never heard of netflix (4, Funny)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375190)

I have the same problem with this as I do with all-you-can-eat buffets. If I leave the buffet and my stomach doesn't hurt, I feel like I haven't gotten my money's worth. Likewise, if I'm paying Netflix $30/month for all the video I can veg out to, I feel like I'm screwing myself if I go outside and take a walk once in a while. Reading a book suddenly gets more expensive too.

Re:Apparently they have never heard of netflix (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33375534)

Netflix starts at 9 dollars. Go fuck yourself in the ass, you fucking liar fuck. You're a royal ball of shit and a fucking liar. You probably lie about other shit around here too. A fucking shitball liar. I hope you lose your job for being a fucking liar.

Re:Apparently they have never heard of netflix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33375572)

And I seriously hope you get some help.

Re:Apparently they have never heard of netflix (1)

Tuan121 (1715852) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375376)

And what happens when you have to step outside of the cave and real-life kicks in and you don't use your monthly subscription much?

Whoops, your math just took a dive.

There are definitely audiences for something like this. Just because you can't see past yourself don't pretend they don't exist.

$8 a month for netflx (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33374968)

Or you can sign up for the cheapest plan with netflix, and get all you can stream videos on the pc, xbox, and the ps3 (I believe the wii as well)

Why would the people who make (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375038)

tv shows want to do this? they could go to hulu and make more money with advertising. The simpsons makes more money per views on hulu then TV.

TV shows are far more throw away them mp3s.

I'll watch Lost on hulu, but I sure as hell wouldn't pay 99 cents an episode.

this has been done, but freer. (2, Interesting)

Slack0ff (590042) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375062)

I'm sure i'm the 100th person to say this, but with services like Hulu (for new episodes) and Netflix Streaming (for back seasons) this seems silly. I cut my cable off 2 years ago and still manage to watch any tv program I want. If it's streaming next day, I watch it there, the commercials don't bug me. If the network is too stubborn to stream it with commercials and risk a little revenue loss, I pirate it. It's all about ease for me. The networks need to wise up quick. I'd gladly pay discovery channel direct for on demand streaming access to there most recent shows, but I don't want to buy it as part of a package full of 100 channels i'm not interested in, and I don't want to have to bend my schedule around when they think the programs should air, and I know i'm not alone on this.

Re:this has been done, but freer. (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375236)

I cut my cable off 2 years ago... You have my deepest condolences. Your significant other has my condolences as well. Did you try having doctors reattach it?

I'm confused (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375118)

Explain to me again why I should pay $0.99 to see something I can Tivo for free and watch on a much larger screen... Oh, that's right, so that I can watch it while I'm driving!

Re:I'm confused (2, Insightful)

vijayiyer (728590) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375688)

How do you Tivo something for free? There's the cost of the Tivo, and, unless it's over the air, some form of subscription service.

Re:I'm confused (1)

alvinrod (889928) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375968)

If you're already paying for cable and can Tivo it, already have Netflix and can stream it, or have already bought the DVD boxset and own it, etc. I can't imagine that this service is for you.

Same reason why people who grow garden vegetables usually don't buy them at the store.

But it's only a dollar! (3, Interesting)

wombat1966 (1886522) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375122)

Actually I think it's a great move. Probably isn't going to attract anyone who wants a whole season of House, but as a mom, I've been stuck countless time in traffic, on a check-out line, or at the doctor's office with a bored cranky kid. At those times I'd gladly shell out a buck for an episode of something- ANYTHING- that will keep Junior entertained and quiet. They are probably also banking, quite literally, on the crowd that hasn't quite figured out that spending one dollar twenty times costs MORE than shelling out ten bucks. Pamhttp://www.talksocialnews.com

in before (1)

Carebears (1867786) | more than 4 years ago | (#33375142)

Prices go to $1.29 in a few months, just like songs.

FAILZORS (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33375206)

$0.99 is a great price (1)

sixsixtysix (1110135) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375528)

but not for what they are giving you. give me the full 1080p, non-drm-ed version (that i can transcode down to whatever format i want) and we'll be about square. for an average 20-some episode season, that works out to be about what you'd pay when they first release it at retail.

Haha, ok (1)

BitHive (578094) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375686)

Assuming 3 hours of TV time per day, I could watch about 90 hour-long TV episodes on Netflix for just $9/month. Apple wants me to pay 10x that? No thanks.

Re:Haha, ok (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 3 years ago | (#33376018)

Yes but you're also waiting on netflix to get the disc in, and then put the disc online.

Compare that to buying the episode just after it airs.

I like this over what I currently do (1)

GWBasic (900357) | more than 3 years ago | (#33375830)

I currently buy 2-3 season passes per year for shows that I really like. It's cheaper then cable, and better then dealing with an unreliable DVR that records commercials and sometimes clips the beginning / end of episodes. Rentals are a lot nicer because most shows I get I only watch once. I'm also less concerned about DRM when content is disposable as opposed to something that I own.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?