- ‘Severance’ is the breakthrough hit Apple TV+ always wanted: Critics love it, and people watch it.
- But! Apple TV+ is nearly six years old, and reportedly losing $1 billion a year.
- Apple can afford those losses. But it’s still unclear why Apple would want to fund a money-losing, niche streamer.
“Severance” is the thing Apple always wanted but never had until this year: An HBO-style show that critics and chattering classes adore — and that regular people actually watch — streaming on its Apple TV+ service. The season finale debuts Thursday night.
That’s the good news for Apple. The less-good news: Apple has been working on Apple TV+ for six years. And it’s still unclear why, exactly, Apple has spent many billions on it.
That’s the takeaway from The Information’s new report on Apple’s high-profile, very expensive service. Reporter Wayne Ma’s story also has a couple data points we haven’t seen reported anywhere else before: He reports, citing people with direct knowledge, that Apple is losing more than $1 billion a year on its streaming service, and that it has some 45 million subscribers — far behind leading services like Netflix and Disney Plus.
It’s not shocking to see Apple losing money on its streamer. Netflix lost money for many years, and all of the would-be Netflix competitors lost lots of money in their first years. But Netflix now makes lots of money, and Wall Street has forced the big media companies that own other streamers to turn those operations profitable, or at least close to it.
But the issue isn’t that Apple, which made close to $100 billion in profit last year, can’t afford to fund Apple TV+ losses. It’s that Apple still seems unclear about why Apple TV+ exists.
Ma says Apple executives have thrown out different ideas that all seem like a stretch — like that people who already own iPhones will be more inclined to keep them if they also watch Apple TV+, or that people who watch Apple TV+ on non-Apple devices might be inclined to buy one if they watch Apple TV+.
“However, the company didn’t have internal data on whether that strategy ultimately led to higher device sales, according to multiple people who worked for Apple TV,” Ma reports. Apple hasn’t responded to my request for comment.
And, of course, there’s the idea that Apple TV+ is just one of the services Apple uses to boost revenue when its core iPhone sales are slowing or actually declining. But that would make more sense if Apple TV+ was profitable or at least break-even.
Which is why people like yours truly, along with many other people who pay attention to media, have remained stumped about Apple’s long-term plan here.
That includes Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos: “I don’t understand it beyond a marketing play, but they’re really smart people. Maybe they see something we don’t,” he told Variety this week.
And there do seem to be limits to how much Apple is able to sink into Apple TV+ at this stage. That’s why Tim Cook has been pressuring the service to watch its spending in general and on movies in particular — despite this weird insistence from Apple that its box office duds were actually profitable.
Who knows? Maybe this is the year Apple TV+ really takes off. Lots of people insist that The Studio, a Hollywood satire starring Seth Rogen that debuts next week is really good, and not just another Hollywood satire. The trailer for F1, a racing movie out this spring starring Brad Pitt, made by the director who made Top Gun: Maverick, looks pretty cool. But it would be weird if Apple continued to burn money on Apple TV+ for years to come without something tangible to show for it.
Read the full article here
