There was a time not so long ago, Apple da was heralded as the Savior of the publishing industry. Steve Jobs company would miraculously convince a generation to pay for online news. Its "tablet", "iPad Jesus" would be so popular with consumers that they would be seduced into paying for a new generation of apps publishers.
It was until last week, when Apple's relationship with the media industry came to a head. With a new set of terms and conditions for digital subscriptions, described as "shamelessly" of one national newspaper Executive, turned against the company by intrinsic publishers quickly to a deep distrust.
Drama, however, was yet to begin. While the media bosses still get their heads around Apple's strict new regime, Google fired a shot across its rival bow with its own, very different attempts to woo newspaper and magazine publishers.
Within 24 hours the landscape looked online news radically different. Apple's natural clock is charming to media types – the commands a 70%-plus chunk nascent tablet market – was shaken. And Google had potentially opened the door to more paywall products.
Apple's new terms of service dictated, the company keeps 30% of revenue from the growing number of publishers in its App Store, including the New York Times, the Daily Telegraph and the Guardian. Publishers can specify price and duration of a subscription, but they are not allowed to offer cheaper quotes outside Apple's bjergomgivne delete the garden. All lucrative customer information remains with Apple.
Google's One Pass, on the other hand, allows publishers to charge for as much or as little content as they wish, mobiles, online and on tablet computers. Specified clearly in opposition to Apple's monolithic approach, allows Google publishers to set their own payment schedule, keep 90% of revenues, and all the lucrative customer information.
But Google's strategy is not without shortcomings – advertisement were clearly rushed out a day after Apple's statement, in an attempt to recruit publishers to its Android platform.
The distinction could hardly be Es. And if Apple could feel his ears burning on Thursday, it should look to Heathrow, where an influential industry body, International newsmedia Marketing Association (INMA), host a hastily convened the Summit with digital leaders from nearly 60 news organizations, including the Daily Telegraph, Le Monde, Dow Jones and Axel Springer.
Mark Challinor, Telegraph Media Group's Director of mobile, was there. "Apple's new policy has certainly made publishers sit and say" Is 30% fair? "," he says. "We got no problem with paying Apple a fee, but the question in the light of Google's One Pass is, is 30% fair?
"I do not think this is about Apple trying to be forceful or anti newspapers-, it is simply a case of them learning as you go-they have not had customers like us before. There is an assumption that Apple has all the answers – they are really not, "adds Challinor, which is also the European Board Director of INMA. "There is a definite need for a dialogue, not monologue, with Apple here."
Financial Times, which generated a tenth of its new digital subscriptions from its iPad app last year, expressed "concerns over changes to an approach that has worked well for our readers and the broader publishing ecosystem around tablet devices, and that can compromise our business model".
Although Google's premature launch seems to have rankled with some publishers – Daily Mail parent company associated newspapers, Google only publicly named UK launch partner, was not even ready to discuss his plans one Pass last week – Apple's Move seems to have done more lasting damage.
IPad-maker's new requirements brought fore hanging concerns about its Hailes forced philosophy. "From conversations I have had with publishers, Apple should experience some doubt [on its subscription policy]," says James McQuivey, an digital media an analyst with Forrester. "The way Apple has dealt with this very offputting for editors – dictating terms and pulls the rug from under their feet.
"There has definitely affected the way publishers will see Apple from now on. We're not going to see any more major publishers – except maybe Rupert Murdoch – stand up and say Apple are doing us a favour. These days are gone. "
Reverberations in Apple's five-paragraph order felt was carefully elsewhere across the creative industries. The nascent music subscription market with Spotify, We7 and Rhapsody, was immediately rendered "profitable", according to Steve Purdham, chief executive of Oxford-based We7. Richard Jones, co-founder of last.FM, put it more bluntly: "Apple hard just over online music subs for iPhone."
' It is no surprise that the answer across the Board is a feeling of absolute shock and horror, ' says Purdham. "But if you take a step back, it is not an unexpected tactics. All Apple's doing is putting a stake in the ground and says, "we have a platform you operate on this platform, so we would like to have a share of your revenues please". "
INMA will resume his industry-wide meeting in may in the meantime, Apple. is expected to come under intense pressure from publishers to review its terms of service, in the light of Google's less prescriptive way of doing things.
"In the big picture, this is very interesting," McQuivey said. "Content companies are cautious both Apple and Google – they do not want either to win. But I would characterize this week as a footnote in chapter one – with 10 chapters left to go ".
No comments:
Post a Comment