iTunes 6 Gets Video

MTV is also running more original programming in hopes of retaining its viewers. 

At 10:25 AM -0700 10/24/05, Marilyn Matty wrote:
>I don't think he needs to shout the "one more thing" too loudly; if
>this takes off, he'll be beating them off with a stick. The average
>viewer of a prime time TV show is worth about 37 cents to the
>station. Even if they split the $1.99 with Apple, the producers will
>be way ahead of the game with each video sold.

That 37 cents is a fascinating number. Do you have any information
about how the rest of the chain (the network, the producers, etc)
earn money in a standard TV show?

>And the TV stations have been up in arms for a while about people
>distributing programs via file sharing. Why not try to make some
>money off of the content they already have?

I think TV shows are an more interesting argument music or movies
when it comes to the file sharing networks. After all, the television
stations and cable companies are creating a highly artificial
environment in which you must view, and they've not been happy about
anything that cuts into that control (VCRs, TiVo, etc). With file
sharing networks, you can download just the shows you want to watch,
even if you missed watching them live or recording them when they
first aired, or ran in reruns.

I'm sure there will be tweaking over time, but that's the reason I
think selling TV shows in the iTunes Music Store will be a hit -
there are plenty of people who would like more control over when,
where, and what they want on TV, and Apple is providing that control.

cheers... -Adam

At 10:25 AM -0700 10/24/05, Marilyn Matty wrote:
>Another great article from Adam about the new iTunes videos, but I do
>have an observation about the economics and viability of music
>videos. Most music videos will often cost more to produce than a
>typical episode of a TV show.

Really? I certainly can see some costing more, but TV shows have so
much more going on generally - more actors, permanent sets, etc.
Though I suppose all that's amortized over many shows.

>Though they have been traditionally given away as promos to MTV,
>etc., one of the reasons that MTV began running so much original
>programming is that the production costs of the videos have
>skyrocketed so high that the music companies could no longer produce
>the number and frequency they originally had.

Ah, that makes sense... And of course it turns into an arms race,
where everyone has to have a snazzier and thus more expensive music
video.

>Since the cost of the videos are typically covered by the advance
>given by the record company, having the ability to sell videos might
>help some artists actually make some money on their recordings. There
>are many fans who would be willing to spend the extra $1 for a video
>from a favorite band, though I doubt if the sales will ever be more
>than a fraction of the iTunes sales.

One thing that I believe is true, but which I didn't want to say in
the article is that a music video isn't just a song with video. It's
a different thing, and I don't believe you can have it in the same
playlists, etc. and just listen to it as music. So in fact, you'd
probably end up buying the song as a song, and then the video as an
extra.

cheers... -Adam

On 10/26/2005 3:04 PM, "Adam C. Engst" wrote:
> One thing that I believe is true, but which I didn't want to say in
> the article is that a music video isn't just a song with video. It's
> a different thing, and I don't believe you can have it in the same
> playlists, etc. and just listen to it as music. So in fact, you'd
> probably end up buying the song as a song, and then the video as an
> extra.

You can create playlists that contain both audio and video files. When
played in iTunes, all files in the playlist, music and video, will play
fine. However, when the playlist is transferred them to an iPod with video,
only the music and music video tracks appear.

So if you want a song *and* its video, and have a video-capable iPod, you
can just buy the video. The downside to this is that the video will take up
significantly more space on your iPod -- for example, the video for Fatboy
Slim's "Weapon of Choice" is 19.2 MB, as opposed to just a few MB as a 128
or 160 kbps music file.

<http://playlistmag.com/reviews/2005/10/itunes6/index.php>


[Thanks for the clarification, Dan - sounds like Apple basically did it right. -Adam]


------------------------
Dan Frakes
Senior Editor, Macworld
Reviews Editor, Playlist
------------------------

On Oct 26, 2005, at 6:04 PM, Adam C. Engst wrote:

> At 10:25 AM -0700 10/24/05, Marilyn Matty wrote:
>
>> I don't think he needs to shout the "one more thing" too loudly; if
>> this takes off, he'll be beating them off with a stick. The average
>> viewer of a prime time TV show is worth about 37 cents to the
>> station. Even if they split the $1.99 with Apple, the producers will
>> be way ahead of the game with each video sold.
>>
>
> That 37 cents is a fascinating number. Do you have any information
> about how the rest of the chain (the network, the producers, etc)
> earn money in a standard TV show?

The $.37 is an average figure that I saw in Ad Age recently, though
it doesn't seem to vary much year to year. It's based on net revenues
for the networks. The figures for who earns what vary wildly
depending upon the particular show, how popular it is at the moment,
the track record of who and what is involved, and occasionally, who
is doing what to whom (though this often isn't discussed or disclosed).

>
>
>> And the TV stations have been up in arms for a while about people
>> distributing programs via file sharing. Why not try to make some
>> money off of the content they already have?
>>
>
> I think TV shows are an more interesting argument music or movies
> when it comes to the file sharing networks. After all, the television
> stations and cable companies are creating a highly artificial
> environment in which you must view, and they've not been happy about
> anything that cuts into that control (VCRs, TiVo, etc).

The panic about DVR's and zapping is subsiding:

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6255862.html?
display=Advertising

> With file
> sharing networks, you can download just the shows you want to watch,
> even if you missed watching them live or recording them when they
> first aired, or ran in reruns.
>
> I'm sure there will be tweaking over time, but that's the reason I
> think selling TV shows in the iTunes Music Store will be a hit -
> there are plenty of people who would like more control over when,
> where, and what they want on TV, and Apple is providing that control.

Maybe it's a step toward a DVR set top/iPod/Mac hookup in the future.

Marilyn

On Oct 26, 2005, at 6:04 PM, Adam C. Engst wrote:

> At 10:25 AM -0700 10/24/05, Marilyn Matty wrote:
>> Another great article from Adam about the new iTunes videos, but I do
>> have an observation about the economics and viability of music
>> videos. Most music videos will often cost more to produce than a
>> typical episode of a TV show.
>
> Really? I certainly can see some costing more, but TV shows have so
> much more going on generally - more actors, permanent sets, etc.
> Though I suppose all that's amortized over many shows.

Factor in the production values, post production work, music
licensing, etc. into the cost of a commercial. Consider also that
many top directors, like Errol Morris who did the "Switchers" and
other Apple ads, Spike Lee, etc., make more money directing
commercials than they do in films, and that Steve Buschemi limits his
acting work to direct commercials, etc. Add in the cost of endorsers,
voice talent (many commercials you hear have top actors doing voice
overs), and it quickly skyrockets.

And permanent sets and fixed locations are cheaper than having to put
together elaborate sets, go on location, etc. constantly.

Animation in commercials and coordinating animation with live action,
is usually more finely tuned and finely crafted than in TV shows.

Marilyn

On Oct 27, 2005, at 1:43 PM, Dan Frakes wrote:
> for example, the video for Fatboy
> Slim's "Weapon of Choice" is 19.2 MB, as opposed to just a few MB
> as a 128 or 160 kbps music file.
>
> <http://playlistmag.com/reviews/2005/10/itunes6/index.php>

Speaking of Fatboy Slim, the video for "The Joker" is available in
Quicktime for free. Though it won't play on a video iPod, it's
definitely worth watching ;-) It's a ZeFrank production.

http://www.waverlyfilms.com/joker.html

Marilyn

I heard an idea today, that selling music videos is a stealth avenue
for the record companies to get that higher price they're looking
for. You want to charge more for that song? Just release the video,
and skip the single.

It also fits with Apple's general strategy of holding the price
points and offering additional features for the up-sell.

--
Andrew Laurence atlaurenes.nacs.uci.edu
Network & Academic Computing Svcs. http://www.nacs.uci.edu/~atlauren/
UC Irvine

On 10/28/05, Marilyn Matty <mmattynyc.rr.com> wrote:
> On Oct 27, 2005, at 1:43 PM, Dan Frakes wrote:
> > for example, the video for Fatboy
> > Slim's "Weapon of Choice" is 19.2 MB, as opposed to just a few MB
> > as a 128 or 160 kbps music file.
>
> Speaking of Fatboy Slim, the video for "The Joker" is available in
> Quicktime for free. Though it won't play on a video iPod, it's
> definitely worth watching ;-) It's a ZeFrank production.

I'd pay for their video of Weapon Of Choice. In fact, it's possibly
the only video i can think of I would buy. And it's not for the song!
:)

<http://www.astralwerks.com/fbs/woc/>


--
<http://2blog.kreme.com/>

A few weeks ago, we had a discussion on TidBITS Talk in which I
mentioned that quite often a commercial will cost more to shoot than
the episode of a TV show that it's broadcast on. I stumbled on this
site, which has some great information, shots and Quicktime videos,
about the production wonderful commercial for Bravia TVs, in which
250,000 colored balls were shot from from projectors and cannons and
sent bouncing down a street in in San Francisco for Sony Europe.
There's lots of fun stuff for anyone interested:

http://www.bravia-advert.com/

IMHO, it's a great metaphor for color, creativity and energy - and
the background music is a great match. Though it doesn't really
connect with the product, it's a strong enough message that it could
make a difference.

Marilyn