Apple TV+ Streaming Service Losing More Than $1 Billion per Year

by

Apple TV+ presents an intriguing scenario within the ongoing streaming battle. On one side, it delivers top-notch original content – shows like Ted Lasso, Severance, and Shrinking have received critical praise and cultivated dedicated fanbases. However, its library appears strikingly limited compared to competitors, with just 69 movies and 139 shows available as of the end of 2023. Given a monthly fee of $10, the narrow selection might sway many prospective subscribers who seek more diversity in their content offerings.

It’s clear that Apple TV+’s influence is relatively small, with only around 45 million subscribers worldwide compared to Netflix’s massive 300 million. This could be due to the fact that Apple TV+ primarily concentrates on its own productions, unlike other services that boast extensive libraries of past content. For instance, Peacock offers almost 4,000 movies and over 1,100 TV shows, while Paramount+ leverages popular series like Yellowstone even as it streamlines its catalog. Apple’s approach of focusing exclusively on original content may attract quality-over-quantity fans, but it could also turn off viewers seeking a wider variety of options.

From a movie enthusiast’s perspective, the shift towards streaming has revolutionized entertainment, yet it hasn’t always been a smooth ride. The allure of on-demand viewing and binge-watching has significantly altered how content is created and enjoyed. Regrettably, this change has also led to the wane of traditional TV and cinema houses. In the past, networks thrived on cable carriage fees that ensured income regardless of viewership ratings. Now, in a cutthroat market where only popular content endures, networks struggle.

Many streaming services find themselves in financial trouble or barely making ends meet, save for Netflix – the solitary profitable titan. Its early entry into the market and shrewd decision-making have allowed it to stay afloat amidst this turbulent sea of change.

It’s quite intriguing that Apple TV+ chose not to release physical copies of their shows and movies, considering the remarkable achievement of CODA. This film broke new ground by being the first to feature a predominantly deaf cast, winning the prestigious Best Picture award. Additionally, Troy Kotsur made history as the first Deaf male actor to win an Oscar in any category, while Siân Heder took home the award for Best Adapted Screenplay. Apple TV+ also made history by becoming the first streaming service to win the Best Picture award at the Academy Awards.

Regardless of the awards it has received, Apple has opted to restrict films such as CODA and others exclusively to digital formats, declining offers from firms like Criterion to produce physical copies. This tactic aligns with Apple’s broader strategy, but it risks losing the favor of collectors and cinephiles who appreciate having a tangible version of remarkable films such as CODA. By passing on the production of physical media, Apple overlooks an extraordinary chance to boost revenue and solidify its cultural impact—both aspects that could assist Apple TV+ in narrowing the gap with rivals boasting larger libraries and more versatile distribution methods.

Apple TV+ stands out among streaming services as its losses are minimal compared to Apple’s vast profit earnings. With a net profit of $94 billion last year alone, Apple has the financial flexibility to play the long game, while many other entertainment companies face difficulty staying afloat. However, to compete effectively, Apple TV+ urgently needs a substantial back catalog. Purchasing a studio such as Disney could instantly resolve this issue, providing Apple with decades of cherished content and boosting its subscriber numbers.

Additionally, there’s increasing rivalry from free streaming services such as Pluto TV and Tubi. These platforms provide vast collections without any charges other than occasional advertisements, making them an attractive choice for consumers frustrated with managing numerous paid subscriptions. Apple’s streamlined strategy could appear refined, but it may lose ground to competitors who focus more on offering a wide range of content and accessibility.

In my perspective as a movie enthusiast, the way we consume entertainment has significantly shifted, and streaming services have been the game-changer. Gone are the days when cable packages made us pay for channels we hardly ever watched. Now, it’s all about providing content that truly captivates viewers—a task that Apple TV+ needs to master if it wants to survive and flourish in this highly competitive market.

Read More

2025-03-24 18:30