According to The Athletic, you won't need to subscribe to Apple TV, only to the MLS programming. The main thing -- for many of us -- will be not having to juggle multiple subscriptions to try to watch games. YouTube is great...when they're showing it. Others are hit or miss. And with a 1080 feed, that thing they're kicking around the field may start looking more like a ball than a big marshmallow.
I sincerely hope they can do a better job at streaming soccer than Paramount. Watching Champion’s League games stutter and buffer was so frustrating.
From what I understand (and my 14 seconds of research shows), AppleTV isn't ranked in the top 10 for any streaming service. Personally this feels like more of a small-time move. If the name 'Apple' wasn't involved which automatically gets some people excited, I think the comments would be 'why the hell would they do that?'
Never had a problem with Paramount even during CL. I think that generally has more to do with where you're streaming from.
I'm not sure where you researched, but AppleTV is 8th in terms of subscriber numbers (19 million), which is ahead of ESPN+ (10th, 14.9 million). They already have the MLB package (not small-time at all), so clearly are positioning themselves as a major player going forward for sports and other content, not just a service for pre-recorded movies and shows (e.g., Netflix). If, as some have predicted, they land the NFL Sunday Ticket (which expires after this NFL season), they will have 3 of the big 5 domestic sports leagues in one form or another. The current price is $7.5 billion per year for that package. Given that they make about $170 billion in profits per year, this is a drop in the bucket for them, but would be a huge coup for them. They are clearly in the early stages of building their content, but have focused on premium offerings, top-tier producers, etc.
It was quick google searches and possibly a little old. I am seeing them in the top 10 with other searches now, but sites like cnet have them at the bottom of the services. 8th, as you mention, isn't so hot either. There are dozens of ways to measure this stuff, but anyway you cut it AppleTV is hardly top tier and something to be overly excited about. (BTW: ESPN+ has over 22mllion subscribers). Don't get me wrong, it's a big money, but it's still not at the top and because of that it's seems crazy to have a 10 year deal. Both sides must be really hoping the partnership will be huge for them. I don't see it right now.
One difference between ESPN+ and the old MLS app. Some years ago, I used to be able to watch old MLS games from the start to the end of the season. But on ESPN+ and Peacock, I find that games don’t go back very far — maybe a few weeks. Right now, ESPN+ blacks out local games for at least 2-3 days, but I often find the local games never show up. I gave up trying. Since there will be no blackouts, I assume we will be able to watch any MLS game anytime, but as I say, probably for a limited period.
If AppleTV were a top five provider, we wouldn't be seeing this deal. Better to have someone who's a little hungry, methinks. But I'm probably being overly optimistic and should take some tequila and a quick nap and hope it goes away.
Somehow I have survived this long never learning to operate a DVR, let alone Apple+. Luddites of the world unite!
AAPL has a $2.1 trillion market cap. If AppleTV isn't contributing its share, Mom and Pop Apple will kick that lagging puppy to the curb. This may be a risk for them, but MLS has a track record so they kinda know what they're getting into, and with WC just a few years away, locking in a ten-year contract may look like genius down the road.
I know, that's why I wrote "They’re “a little hungry” and have oh, a $2.1 trillion market cap". This is not really a "risk" when you have a $2.1 trillion market cap. :--)
CNET is reporting on the size of the content library, not subscribers. Other services have a back catalog of old content that they launched with. Apple is building it from scratch, and have clearly focused on quality over quantity as evidenced by the awards their shows have been winning. As usual, they have a long-term, premium strategy, designed to ultimately drive hardware sales. What's critical for the MLS deal is not content but subscribers, and most importantly, paid subscribers. Crunchyroll is on the list of top services (at # 3 or 4) due to a lot of free subscribers, but they only have about 4 million paid. They are clearly not a top-tier streaming service, but a niche one. Amazon Prime, which is number 2, also has inflated numbers as most people buy that for the shipping, not the movies or shows. The first Peacock tier is also free. The AppleTV+ numbers I found are actual paid subscriptions (after subtracting free subscriptions that people get when they buy phones). If you count paid subscriptions only, AppleTV+ is top 5. If you count all unpaid (like they do for the other services, but not for AppleTV+ in the numbers I found), AppleTV+ is top 3, given that they sell almost 100 million phones per year in the U.S., all with free AppleTV+. I think you're clearly undervaluing them.
Thanks for the info. Also, the The Athletic article is definitely a must-read in helping to clarify the whole deal. While there are certain aspects of this that are pretty exciting for us MLS fans/viewers, it's sad that with no more Earthquakes games on NBC Sports California/ Bay Area come next season, the perception among the general sports watching population around here will be that the Earthquakes aren't worthy after all to be mentioned in the same breadth as the 49ers/Giants/Athletics/Warriors/Sharks. That the Earthquakes (and MLS in general) decided instead to isolate themselves in their own "room" since no one else wants them, so to speak. Also, no more Anthony Passarelli, Chris Dangerfield and Danielle Slaton to provide a local Earthquakes touch. In any case, any guesses on where the new centralized broadcast facility will be? Near Cupertino (Apple), New York City (MLS), Los Angeles or somewhere else? GO SAN JOSE EARTHQUAKES!!! -G
Not a risk at all to the rich parent company. But a few hundred people at AppleTV stand to lose their jobs if things don't work out. They have to earn their keep.
I don't think so - they'll just absorb it and go after the next one. Gotta move fast in that business, and take chances, and I'm sure they are used to "misses".
Apple the company, no problem. It's the AppleTV group that will pay the price. I've seen it over and over again in the valley -- Google, HP, Adobe -- they step outside their core business, test out a new venture, and then cut their losses sooner rather than later.
Like almost all long term sports broadcast deals, they are overpaying up front and underpaying at the end. How long that is will probably be dependent on how the USA does in the next two World Cups. USA does well and overall viewership will go up.
Whatever happened in the wake of 1994, sports broadcasting is nothing like what it was then. So maybe?
I think it's too soon to say all of that. The Apple TV deal is not exclusive and games will still be available on traditional linear (non streaming) platforms. I think it's unlikely for NBC bay area to continue covering the quakes but it's far from impossible. The details will be revealed in the coming months.
As someone who is subscribed to Apple TV+ I can confirm they are focused on quality over quantity as it is evident. I initially signed on for the free trial, but since it is far cheaper than netflix and I personally think the shows and movies on Apple are much better than Netflix in general I decided to keep Apple beyond the free trial. Severance is the best show I've watched in a long time. Apple TV is also the first streaming platform to win the oscar for best picture for CODA. An excellent movie. The fact Apple won best picture before Netflix did is telling of the two platforms different strategies. Netflix is quantity over quality all the way. However, with netflix stock tanking as it is I hear they are shifting strategies and they will also focus on quality shows and movies as it clearly seems to be the winning formula. Why it took them this long to figure it out I don't know.
btw - rumor has it Apple has already landed the NFL deal - they are just choosing to delay the announcement for whatever reasons.
I don't know why, but reading through the last dozen or so posts immediately brought this to my mind. Perhaps I need help:
I heard parts of a segment on this on SiriusXM Soccer Channel. Generally the host brought up the same things discussed here. This is not one of the more popular platforms out there. Both sides are hoping the partnership will advance both sides. There skepticism on this is pretty high. This deal translates into more money for player budgets/salaries based on the way the contracts work. Local broadcasters will likely lose their jobs including those who have done games in NY & LA markets since 1996. This 'solves' the problem in many local markets of blacked out games or having to figure out where to watch the games. It was a mess last year, apparently, in DC so much so that they ended up streaming games on their website. This could be a decent saving for some when looked at in an MLS bubble. To get ESPN+, you need ESPN which means signing up to some sort of expensive live TV package which caries it. From an MLS standpoint, there is no longer a need to subscribe to services like cable, Hulu, etc. It was a good segment and I wish I could have listened to more. I may go back and find it.
The two best parts: 1. Subscription included for season ticket holders. Season ticket holders will also get access to the new MLS streaming service with their full-season ticket packages. 2. A six hour whip-around show every weekend!! There will also be a whip-around show so fans never miss any action, an element that Stevenson is particularly excited by. That’s on top of pushing content through the Apple News platform and originally-produced programming that’s available alongside game replays, highlights and analysis. “That whip-around show will be as long as six hours because most of the games will start at 7 or 8 o'clock local, depending on when the club wants to have kickoff,” Stevenson said. “But you can imagine what a Saturday night's going to look like. It's almost like Decision Day every single Saturday night where we're in and out of games and there's no more local restrictions. So the fan viewing experience is going to be very different.” (source) Even if there's no more expansion for a while, a soon-to-be 30 team league after StLouis and Vegas, with every team playing on a Saturday night, that's 15 games (15 x 2 hours = 30 hours of game content) over 5-6 hours for the whip-around show. If Shep "YA TALK ABOUT..." Messing loses his job that is yet another positive from this deal.