CBS CEO Les Moonves says the network is still in negotiations with Apple over its inclusion in Apple's upcoming streaming television service, reports Bloomberg. In an interview with Bloomberg TV this morning, Moonves said CBS has had conversations with Apple and will "probably" ink a deal with the Cupertino company.
"Apple is having conversations with everyone about doing their own streaming services," Moonves said in an interview Wednesday on Bloomberg TV. "We have had those conversations, as have the other networks. Do I think something will happen? Probably, but I do not know when."
Moonves made similar comments five months ago at Re/code’s Code Conference, saying CBS would "probably" sign a deal with Apple for its rumored streaming television service. "We're very excited about it," he said, and at that time, he confirmed he had met with Eddy Cue to discuss the plans as part of an "ongoing conversation."
/article-new/2015/10/les_moonves_bloomberg.jpg?lossy)
Given the similarity between the statement given in May and what Moonves had to say today, there is little evidence of any progress in the talks between Apple and content owners, but it's clear there is still interest in reaching a deal.
Apple's web-based television service was initially rumored to be launching in 2015, perhaps alongside the new Apple TV, but a continued failure to secure all of the necessary deals has reportedly delayed its debut until 2016. Apple is said to be having trouble with content negotiations, with pricing being a sticking point.
Apple's plan is to offer a selection of popular television channels at a price of $30 to $40 per month, a price tag that undercuts most cable television services. While Apple's streaming television service is still in the works with a launch date unknown, the company’s new set-top box will be launching at the end of the month.
The new Apple TV is already in developer hands and will be available to the general public in late October. The device includes a full App Store, universal search, deep Siri integration, and a touch-based remote for navigating the interface and playing games.
Top Rated Comments
Also, in my mind, even $30-40 a month for TV is absurd. Not to mention those channels are all laced with commercials; why is the subscription price justified? Is that even that good of a price relative to the legacy providers, after factoring in the cost of internet as well?
Above all else, I may be in the minority, but TV is a massive waste of time. 100s of channels to waste away your days staring at a TV. I watch about an hour a day when we wind down for the night and I already think that's too much.
I refuse to pay for channels that are available free OTA.
Latest census data show that over 80% of the US population lives in urban areas, so all these folks are likely well within range of a accessing an OTA tower using a cheap indoor antenna.
For the other less than 20%, I guess it might make sense to pay for streaming CBS.
I want this to happen so bad and cut ties with cable. I mean I know I will still have internet with them but seriously if apple provided a 30 dollar a month thing that would be awesome. Cut my bill by over 100 bucks.
Unfortunately, for now we still need them for hi-speed internet access. If or when we all desert them for our content needs, I suspect they'll try to recoup those losses thru increased bandwidth charges.Latest census data show that over 80% of the US population lives in urban areas, so all these folks are likely well within range of a accessing an OTA tower using a cheap indoor antenna.
For the other less than 20%, I guess it might make sense to pay for streaming CBS.
Exactly. Why the heck would I pay for free network stations unless I was in a seriously rural area (that may not have decent enough internet to support streaming anyway)?
I would cut the cord if Apple delivers all the espn channels and fix sport channels for under $40 a month. 75 percent of directv is crap.Also, in my mind, even $30-40 a month for TV is absurd. Not to mention those channels are all laced with commercials; why is the subscription price justified? Is that even that good of a price relative to the legacy providers, after factoring in the cost of internet as well?
Above all else, I may be in the minority, but TV is a massive waste of time. 100s of channels to waste away your days staring at a TV. I watch about an hour a day when we wind down for the night and I already think that's too much.