Unlike other streaming networks, Apple TV has a lot of backing from leadership to remain prestige and passion driven, as it's a good loss leader and brand maker for Apple.
For example, look at the zeitgeist Ted Lasso, Severance, Tehran, and Pachinko have all been able to leverage.
People don't want to pay a monthly subscription to watch 5 good shows (all drama, btw). Apple TV lacks breadth for the average consumer, at least relative to the competition.
Netflix lost money its first 13-years (in aggregate).
And wasn’t really until year 18-year, that the money it made became meaningful.
When you don’t have a catalog, creating content is expensive.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/272561/netflix-net-incom...
Steve Jobs had Pixar and iTunes; Tim Cook had Apple TV+, I guess. Apple couldn’t possibly be Apple without some play at cultural significance.
I know old Stevenotes in the heyday of iTunes would make a habit of bringing in musicians to show they could - John Mayer etc. - and I guess Ben Stiller and Adam Scott may be up next.
Apple famously does not track profits by division but profits overall-
How can you spend so much when it only has 10 shows and 10 movies?
They struggle to even fill the top 10 list because they often don’t have enough shows or movies.
Currently Apple has 54 billion in cash and cash equivalents (down $100B since 2023 in dividends, stock buybacks, and capex). They can keep this going for a while.
Honestly it might be a bargain, simply for maintaining a certain brand image. Apple has a huge pile of cash, and with respect this is content very very very few other companies are willing to or can afford to make. It buys Apple a kind of mind share that will last & endure & keep paying our, will maintain the Apple name, in a way that nothing else Apple could possibly do would.
Worth it.
[dead]
[flagged]
Maybe leadership at Apple want to make good TV and they’re using some of Apple’s incredible wealth to bootstrap it or passion project it?