Sure, it's all speculation, but since it ties into a previous idea of mine, I have no choice but to model it.
The Apple TV + problem
The problem, known to all, is one: the content. And the speed at which they can be generated. And Apple's demands on the kind of material they are willing to fund (high quality, with a focus on the familiar world and, if possible, backed by reputable names).
If you want to build a library of original content, getting volume will take time.
Another added problem is that Apple entered the market when there were other established companies for years, such as HBO, Hulu, Amazon, or Netflix, who have already established their catalog of old content by digging and keeping the best.
What's more, Apple launched its Apple TV + service when big content holders had already decided that instead of firing them, they could exploit it directly, like Disney.
This has led to a saturation of subscriber portfolios. No one can subscribe to so many content services, and the weakest of them all is Apple TV +.
So Apple is stuck in an impossible situation. It cannot speed up the creation of content (the coronavirus has arrived only to add insult to injury) and it cannot "fill" the spaces with a catalog of "big hits" already licensed to other companies.
The free year of Apple TV + for those who buy an Apple device with a screen guarantees continuity of subscribers, but no income, but no original content that grabs attention and becomes "the series everyone is talking about" the growth of that subscriber base it will be marginal.
What could Apple do to offer content that no one has and that continuously and automatically generates new programs?
Apple's best option for attracting significant masses of subscribers to its platform would be to focus on content niches that have not yet been exploited and which, due to their exclusivity, become a claim.
Apple needs content that is continually generated, that arouses interest among very large groups of people, and that remains loyal because this type of content is only available on Apple TV +.
A glance at the grid reveals that the fiction is already trite. Sometimes it will be HBO, other times Amazon Prime, sometimes Netflix… and always Disney, whose conglomerate of brands is a machinery to generate fiction in all fields.
Other areas, despite having a skilled audience that consumes continuously, have no critical mass to justify success: documentaries, for example.
Apple has made a few forays into the documentary area, with The Elephant Queen, LGTBI Visibility, the Home series (Avant-garde Houses, an ambiguous title on the authentic content of documentaries) and the recent “Dear…” - as well as the pending release of the "Greatness Code" on famous athletes.
But documentaries, while adding prestige and a loyal audience, do not justify a massive investment to become "the destination of choice" for that audience (other than the fact that there are already excellent documentaries on any subject you can imagine).
The solution: live content
We have streaming platforms associated with video on demand (VOD), but in the Apple situation we have described, that option may take too long to be viable.
Music
For years Apple has held the iTunes Festival, a series of concerts held in London featuring the hottest, latest or hottest of the moment.
We could say it was too early, even if they had a Music Store to promote. But now, who can take advantage of the contents in 360 degrees, it is time to take them back to full capacity.
Covid-19 has canceled festivals for months and how long they will take to return. Artists and record labels have sold out their fantastic promotional tool and all fans are thirsting for live music.
Please Apple, relive the Apple Music Festival weekly, monthly or however you like, and give the world the opportunity to see bands we would otherwise never know, or with whom we would never have the opportunity to share an evening.
The sport
If there is a niche in the market that moves millions (of people and money), it is sport.
To date, the rights of the various sports practices have been bought by pay TV channels in different countries, through an auction system (the one who pays the most is the one who gets them).
If Apple took over the broadcasting rights of the NFL, the NBA, NASCAR, ... or the World Cup or the Olympics, to broadcast exclusively via Apple TV + ... many of the retention and recruiting problems would be largely solved.
Obviously, Apple could then re-license other operators in the rest of the world where their presence is smaller, recovering a large part of the investment.
And why would Apple do such a thing? What can Apple contribute?
This is where - finally - we come to the news that suggests that something like this is being studied deep inside the Cupertino offices.
A few days ago we learned about the purchase of NextVR. This we said about her:
It offers experiences to see live shows using the immersive glasses we know (…). In addition, it has agreements with NBA, Fox Sports, Wimbledon and other live entertainment: sports, dance and musical concerts.
But to show that this is something Apple is taking seriously, now this:
Apple has hired Amazon Video's executive in charge of sports content, James DeLorenzo, to work on Apple TV +.
DeLorenzo has been head of the sports division since 2016 and was also senior vice president of the Audible subscription service (also from Amazon).
Conclusion
As on many occasions, instead of fireworks we could find ourselves in front of a rocket, and everything dissolves like wet gunpowder without ever materializing anything important.
But if Apple is in the "think big" phase, as it demonstrated at the launch of Apple TV +, we can imagine that its plans to change the rules on subscription video platforms are also big and closely tied to the return on investment.
And sport (and music) can offer you just that. Huge unconditional followers who, with a modest amount, meet every week to watch content available only on Apple TV +, and in a different way than before.
Time will tell and we will continue to report
