Comments on: Variety: iTunes wants to cut prices of TV shows

By: Austin

Austin — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 00:20:33 +0000

I don’t understand NBC’s actions more than I don’t understand Apple’s actions. I paid C$51 plus tax (about C$55 to C$60) for Heroes season 1 on DVD. I won’t pay more than this for a season of shows WITH EXTRAS, which means that my target price for digitally downloaded episodes is significantly lower (C$1.99 would be a little high as far as I’m concerned, since it’s C$44 for a 22-episode season, and values the extras at a mere $7.)

NBC doesn’t get that. Apple does. Most consumers *won’t* pay more than the established price for an episode, which has been established by the networks themselves through DVD collections. (And those few who will do so generally have more money than sense.

By: Treehouse

Treehouse — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 23:52:34 +0000

The Long Tail and Simplicity.

In my opinion, Apple makes more money with the simpler model.

By: tc

tc — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 04:45:52 +0000

You CAN buy full seasons of television shows on iTunes. A full season of The Office costs 34.99. And not every TV show is 1.99. Ken Burns Jazz is 9.99 an episode, NOVA is 7.99 an episode, and the Battlestar Galactica 4 episode Miniseries can only be bought as a package for 15.99. Having said that, I’m not inclined to buy any of those television shows online for more than 1.99 an episode. Do you think that Apple might have a clue about what people are willing to pay for product?

NBC’s action to pull its shows from iTunes seems like its supposed to hurt Apple, but in reality, it hurts the people who like the iTunes store and prefer to buy shows there. I’m not interested in having to chase NBC’s content and have to view it on their proprietary sites.

If the networks want to keep people from stealing their shows, they have to make it really easy to buy them, which the iTunes store does, in terms of pricing and ease of use.

By: Rick

Rick — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 17:51:13 +0000

Part of the iTune’s price point is marketing, but some of it is also a control issue.

Networks would like variable pricing, and indeed I’ve heard people with NBCU argue that the logical way to price an episode of, for instance, “Heroes” would be something like $3.99 the week following the premiere of the episode, then dropping perhaps a dollar until the season is over. The episodes could then be packaged as a season set and the individual episodes would become unavailable.

While that idea would certainly make things more lucrative for NBCU in the short-term, it doesn’t suit Apple’s needs, and I think you can make an arguement that it would be less than ideal for the customers.

But what NBCU wants to do is ultimately drive people away from iTunes, and towards stand-alone sites and the new Hulu, which focuses more on imbedded ads than sales to drive revenue.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 01:32:03 +0000

iTunes isn’t the only place that sells songs. If labels start jacking up prices on iTunes, people will go to places like Rhapsody, where they can listen for free and download for 89 cents.

By: Cory Bergman

Cory Bergman — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 22:25:48 +0000

I feel torn on this one. Apple’s success is partially built on simplicity, as Frank mentions. In this world of media companies scrambling for digital revenue, sometimes the user gets lost. In fact, it happens more often than not. And Apple has always made the user their highest priority. (Well, except when they screwed the first iPhone buyers, but let’s call that a learning experience.)

On the other hand, as Safran maintains, if it’s your product, you should be able to set your own price point. Or at the very least, offer more than a single $1.99 option — like .99, $1.99 and $2.99 — which I think is Apple’s best solution.

By: Frank Catalano

Frank Catalano — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 21:50:08 +0000

It’s called marketing. It is far easier to communicate that “all songs are one price, and all TV shows one price” and have customers browse with the confidence that they won’t have to make two decisions every time they see a show or song they want: Whether they want it, and whether it’s worth the price.

If they know what the price is before browsing, they’ve already made the decision that they’re willing to spend that amount. They don’t have to revisit it based on the perceived value of the show or song.

In marketing, simpler is better. And Jobs is a master marketer.

By: Anon

Anon — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 19:49:18 +0000

I find it strange too that they are not flexible. I won’t argue about price points, but what I don’t understand is why Apple refuses to package seasons together? It would be much easier to download a whole season of Office episodes rather than one at a time.

By: M Gorman

M Gorman — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 18:51:32 +0000

Not to come off as an Apple fanboy, but I think the flat pricing gives Apple some strength to say to the networks (and recording labels), “Sorry, it’s 1.99 (or $.99) for everybody.”

I have to say, I had a monetary limit for how much I would pay for something that I could probably TiVo for “free.” (Monthly fee notwithstanding) $2 seemed a bit much, but now that it’s $1, I’ll be giving it a much harder look now.

By: Tribster

Tribster — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 18:33:56 +0000

Very good Point Steve.