MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Do they ask TV manufacturers for a cut of THEIR sales?

Perhaps the question should be how can NBC make so much money on the backs of the creative people that create the content for their shows.

The thought plickens.


MW: reaction

We don't mind, any programme to screw you over with

"Totally off topic . . ."
MDN you are the best !!!!!!!!!

Since the geniuses at NBC at dumbed-down The Office in its fourth season -- they might as well put a fake laugh track on it -- the same geniuses at NBC have probably asked for that --

there's nothing really worth watching on NBC anymore.

Buh-buh, NBC.................

Perhaps if NBC U put out a quality product then they would earn a decent income. Perhaps they should make their own digital music/video play. They could call if the Nune.

Whilst NBCU's Zucker is a greedy asshøle, tacitly encouraging your readers to steal content is not a good thing. Getting something for nothing as being bad - as you point out in reference to Zucker and NBC was a correct comment. It is also bad for individuals to do the same.

Your 'off-topic' comment about torrents should be removed.

Wow. So Ex-Lax should get a cut of Charmin's action?....

MW:too

Do cell phone manufacturers ask service providers for a cut of their income? Of course not! Oh wait, Apple does.

If there was "only" $15 mio revenue, i.e. not enough sales, then, perhaps, raising the price is not the smartest move?
These suits don't get it. They're competing against a zero-cost competitor, a.k.a. BitTorrent. 15 Mio, at no distribution costs, sounds like a sweet deal compared with what they have now, which is zero, nada, zip, rien, nichts.

Screw NBC. As MDN said iTunes raised it's ratings. They're getting paid for the shows. Music didn't sell well in the beginning either. I question the market size for people buying TV shows anyway. That said it's still good exposure for NBC to keep it's content on the ipod even if they have another way to get it of their own. They sound jealous and completely out of it.

First thing; that rant about encouraging pirating should go. As much as I agree that NBC ought to be punished, this kind of advice is a bit over the line, on principle.

As for NBC and its shows, while many of us may decide not to watch (or worse, steal and watch), it will be inconsequential for NBC. We are such a small group, it's totally below the radar. Besides, boycott as a means of delivering a message never actually worked in the US. European nations are much better and more disciplined about that, and it shows. When they mobilise themselves to boycott a company, that company hurts seriously. Here (in the US), it never works, since Americans value their personal convenience way above anything else. No boycott was ever successfully attempted on any larger scale in the US (anyone remember mass e-mails boycotting Exxon-Mobile to drive the gas prices down?).

The point is, NBC will in the end be the victim of its own undoing. That Hula thing will be marginally successful, but mostly irrelevant. ITunes will continue to rake in cash (with or without NBC U). While $15 Million was perhaps change between sofa cushions for NBC U, it was totally free change. No effort on their part was required for this money to come in.

NBC will return to iTunes. They have no other choice, as all other choices will ultimately be unsuccessful. And it won't matter if we watch NBC, download torrents of it, or boycott it altogether.

It takes broadcast gear to drive the transmission and cable systems. Does Zucker want a cut of that?

It takes wire to move the signal from device to device. Does Zucker want a cut of that?

It takes electricity to any of this. Does Zucker want a cut of that?

When Best Buy sells their season DVDs, they have to buy display furniture and have them trucked in. Does Zucker want a cut from the particle board, gasoline, and truck business?

Let's get simple here - his organization buys and distributes entertainment product. His organization is fat and sloppy. The products he must buy and subsequently sell are becoming less and less compelling. His business is circling the bowl and he is making the sounds bites of someone not in control.

Goodbye Zuck.

after paying salaries, there was only 15 million left.

Just a thought here.

But aren't those tv shows that NBC wants to "SELL" , FREE on regular tv??????

If I or a friend uses a VCR, I get to watch them anytime for FREE.

But Zucker is mad that he can not RAISE the price for a FREE show ???

I miss the point where Zucker makes any sense except the business sense for getting more money for screwing the artists even more and of course, raising his bonus.

weird, just weird.

en
MDN = parts as in Parts of Zucker just do not work.

The only NBC show i watch is the Office, and even that is starting to get a little old. I have a feeling Zucker won't be at NBC Universal too much longer unless NBC can get out of its funk of horrible TV shows.

Leopard hits on EVERY one!

Getting mine now.

At $2.99 an episode, a 24-episode season of "The Office" would cost $71.76 -- and that's without any extra features. DVD box set prices (though at first seemingly high in the $35 - $50 range) are nowhere near that mark.

What is NBC thinking?!

That's $15 million additional dollars that weren't there before... in the first year, only US (not available yet elsewhere... lots to be made worldwide)...he makes no sense at all.

I think it is a bit silly to people to rant about NBC's decision on this. They don't owe Apple anything, and if they want to charge more for their product it's their decision. The market will judge weather they are right or wrong in how they've valued their product. Either customers will buy it or they wont.

Apple also can make the decision on what they will carry on iTunes, just as a retailer can decide what to put on the shelf.

I've said it before, but it really is amazing how the entire entertainment industry has lost it's way by focusing on distribution channels and how they will sell product instead of being more concerned about the quality of the product they are delivering

Usually, if you give customers a good quality product, getting paid a fair price for it takes care of itself.

Just look to Apple as an example.

Not that I agree with NBC wanting a cut of iPod revenue.

But how is this different from Apple wanting a cut of AT&T;'s network revenue?

"But how is this different from Apple wanting a cut of AT&T;'s network revenue?"

It's a business agreement that AT&T;agreed to in order to get exclusivity concessions from Apple on the iPhone. If Apple had asked for it, AT&T;certainly had the right to say no, which they didn't.

What Zucker is implying is that his company has an inherent right to profits from iPod sales.

I always like how they state what they netted. i.e. $15 million translates probably into over $900 million grossed. It's sounds to me that someone at NBC U should take a serious look at their financials and find out who's being grossly overpaid.. <ahem>Zucker</ahem>

@Macromancer,

Hmm. I understand that the AT&T;thing was a business deal, but so would the NBC thing if Apple agreed to it..

Apple feels (or felt) that they had an inherit right to take a cut of AT&T;'s revenue. It's really the same thing that NBC feels, although AT&T;agreed to Apple's demands, and Apple won't (and shouldn't) agree to NBC's demands.

I think the logic here is being twisted a bit because the NBC request is not in Apple's favor.

Just my 2 cents.

The networks are not content creators. They are syndicators -- middle men. In the end, SJ can offer the real producers of content, the actual production companies, to put their un-fscked up content on iTunes and cut out the MiddleZuckers of the TV networks -- with no ads and the bulk of the payments going to the content creators.

From SJ to Jeffy, "SIOOMA."

So they maid $15 million proffit last year for doing.....nothing. And they're complaining?

Roger, there's nothing really worth watching on NBC anymore.

Buh-buh, NBC.................

Get the British 'Office' if you want the original and hilarious one.

How is directing readers to torrent sites 'bad'? The networks have already broadcast these shows 'for free' over the air--how is recording the show on a dvr wrong or sharing that recording? Basically people share what was/is already allowed to be otherwise recorded. Don't try to defend networks that are essentially double-dipping on ALREADY BROADCASTED TV programs and taking advantage of folks who evidently are unable to record the show themselves by making them pay for a copy. Puh-lease--NBC can rot in He**

The market will judge weather they are right or wrong in how they've valued their product.

The market judges the rain and wind now?? Whether - whether.

MacDailyNews Take: We're all for people getting fair compensation for their work.

Here is the rub. This is not really about the "work" that NBC Universal and Jeff Zucker have done regarding entertainment. This is the about the work of selling eyeballs to advertisers, work which Zucker and NBC Universal are not doing well. Maybe NBC Universal should try manufacturing QUALITY product.

nice take MDN. my sentiments also.

It was reported today that Hulu took a $100 million investment from Providence Equity Partners. I suppose this was known, but imagine if Apple had been that equity partner...

Still, if Hulu is to be such a slam dunk, then why don't these MASSIVE parnters, News Corp, and NBC Universal need an investment?

and so the plot thickens!...

Im not even gonna state the obvious, but Apple did the right thing with this scum - bypass the broadcasting channels and go straight to the program makers and strike a deal with them direct.

Excellent business move.

If NBC wants a share of the television hardware profit, maybe the should do like the DuMont Television Network.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuMont_Television_Network

The first US television network, they started broadcasting in 1946. They also made the television sets.

They ceased operation in 1956.

Maybe NBC could learn from history.

@Mac Zeus
Apple gave AT&T;5 years of exclusive rights to sell the iPhone in exchange for some revenue. NBC has never given Apple exclusive rights to be the only channel to their content, nor have they asked for that. Apple built the entire ecosystem on their own dime and offered NBC a chance to make some revenue on a product they were already broadcasting into millions of home for free. iTunes did nothing to change NBC's advertising revenue model, so the iTunes channel was 100% gravy. This is what they walked away from, just so Zucker could prove his dick is bigger than Steve Job's. Zucker's decision does NOTHING to improve NBC's bottom line, and that is his one and only job. However, I do think that Job's should have allowed NBC to hike the price on one show just to prove how sales would dry up at the higher price point.

Some might compare this against Apple getting royalties on AT&T;contracts, but it's not the same. AT&T;wouldn't have those contracts without Apple's device. In other words, Apple should be collecting even _more_ from NBC Universal.

The iPod sells music, not the other way around.

How much is the Office worth? If 30 seconds of prime time advertising space is $1million +, then a weekly show can bring in $$$$ -- far more than any al a carte sales. iTunes made the Office, otherwise it would have been cut from the NBC lineup.

This is where the money is, advertising. You can never replace the value of the advertising unless you charge too much or can supplement sales (in this case NBC wanted iPod $$).

Personally, I think NBC should give Apple a cut of the advertising $$ for making the Office popular.

On the back of his content?!?! What if I buy an iPod and play nothing but indie music on it? What if I buy video on iTunes by indie filmmakers? Heck, what if I buy from other big labels and studios and NOT NBC? Does that mean NBC should still get paid money? How incredibly absurd. I'd just love to find a way for people to pay ME money for other people's products. Hmm...maybe I should become a label exec.

<quote>
"But how is this different from Apple wanting a cut of AT&T;'s network revenue?"

It's a business agreement that AT&T;agreed to in order to get exclusivity concessions from Apple on the iPhone. If Apple had asked for it, AT&T;certainly had the right to say no, which they didn't.
</quote>

In addition, Apple only gets a cut of the iPhone-generated AT&T;customers. Think of it as an incentive to Apple to make sure the iPhone only works with AT&T;.

RE: Apple getting a piece of the revenue on iPhone accounts at AT&T;.
1. Apple is the hardware provider, just like it is with iPods. AT&T;does not get a cut of the revenue on iPhones, except on those it sells from their own channels. Can't compare this to NBC wanting a piece of the money from the delivery mechanism. For it to be comparable, NBC should be paying Apple for evey video capable iPod that is sold.
2.Apple only gets a piece of the revenue from iPhone accounts, not every AT&T;cell account. Which is what NBC is asking for, in essence.
3.In exchange for this piece, AT&T;has exclusivity. Perhaps if the ONLY way to acquire the NBC shows was via iTMS, then NBC could ask for a BIGGER piece than they already get. But it isn't and they will have to settle for zero for a while.

At some point, a large shareholder will ask, "Why are we pouring money down a hole with no return, when we had an outlet that cost us nothing, generated revenue and profits, and increased revenue in an indirect manner, on our broadcast assets. Disregarding profit from the iTMS, how much greater is the profit on a show like 'The Office', which might not have lasted a season otherwise?"

Boycott. Flame. Boycott. Flame. Boycott. Flame.

I love the smell of a good consumer war in the morning.

you chaps should check out http://www.scrapetorrent.com ... rather like torrents.to but simpler & prettier

go!

Interesting that you erased my message about stealing MDN content, but don't mind people stealing content from NBC. Want a little hypocrite with that?

Someone before me made an interesting poser about this record/download thing. Maybe somebody with the knowledge can explain:

If the tv shows are already being shown on free-to-air channels, is it illegal for you to record it and then make it available for download? I mean, it's already free isn't it?

Pls excuse my ignorance. Anyone?

FINALLY, THE REAL TRUTH COMES OUT. And now we know why Jobs wouldn't agree with a deal with them. This is where all companies should draw the line. What does NBC or any of the movie, tv, or music industry have to do with the iPod. Did they help develop it, NO, did they help market it, NO, did they do anything in terms of bringing the iPod to where it is today, NO! Apple invented, created, developed, manufactured, and marketed the iPod on its own. No one has any rights to any of its profits except Apple. That would be like Apple asking GM to fork over some of its profits just because they have a computer in there car. It just doesn't make any sense! GREEDY IS THE ONLY WORD TO DESCRIBE THE ENTERTAINMENT CEO'S PERIOD.

It's amazing how stupid some execs are. This Zucker guy seems really, like others have said, out of touch to the extreme. That Zune deal with Universal will never fly while SJ is alive. Absolute absurdity.

Secondly, I must disagree with HueyLong and agree with some others. These shows are broadcast out in the open air, then resold later (as has been said, double dipping). I say once they're out there, they're out there. You are not stealing. If I forget to Tivo "The Office" and get it later via some other mechanism I'm not "stealing" from NBC. Sorry I'm not. The VCR was the same thing just nobody could program one. Now I have options. DVRs haven't really changed the game, they just made it so much easier. Now if you are downloading the entire season of "The Office" instead of buying the DVD, well, a different argument can be made.

Apple did not [sell] "millions of dollars worth of hardware off the back of [their] content"--that's a ridiculous comment on its face.

@critic critic

"The market judges the rain and wind now?? Whether - whether."

Actually, it does.

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/optioninvestor/05/052505.asp

I have purchased some TV content from iTunes, but not much. I did purchase last year's entire season of Battlestar Galactica because I wanted to keep up with the show and it was cheaper to get it through iTunes than pay for cable. However, even if it were offered again this year I am not sure I would order it. The show went in a direction I didn't like and it grew tiring.

Beyond that I really have a hard time paying $1.99 for content I am only ever going to watch once. I never watch TV shows more than once - probably most people do as well. There just isn't that many shows that are worth $1.99.

Plus, now that I have Elgato's eyeTV product, I can record TV shows in HD (or standard def) and export them to my iPod. It is really slick - like TiVo for your iMac. I love it! Now I will spend even less on TV shows through iTunes...

Roger said it best:

Buh-buh, NBC............

[See you back on iTunes after Zucker is fired.]

I think MDN's comments pertaining to BitTorrents are poignant and appropos in light of recent comments by Zucker that Apple has "destroyed" the music business. Instead of interpreting them literally, place a comedic slant on them. The implication is that Apple has not done anything of the sort and that all those folks that were using the torrents to download their music prior to the introduction of iTunes will now do the same with TV shows. Apple saved the music industry, they destroyed themselves with greed and outdated business models. Consumers will pay a fair price for legal content rather than pirating it, remove the option altogether and they're likely to steal it.

These shows are broadcast out in the open air, then resold later (as has been said, double dipping). I say once they're out there, they're out there. You are not stealing. If I forget to Tivo "The Office" and get it later via some other mechanism I'm not "stealing" from NBC. Sorry I'm not.

It doesn't sound like you understand IP law at all so you might want to tone down you're overconfident assertions.