∞ An Apple television could add $6 billion in revenue by 2014

Written by

There has been a lot of chatter lately about Apple releasing its own branded television. If it does happen, the projected revenue for Apple by one industry analyst is up to $6 billion a year.

[ad#Google Adsense 300x250 in story]Gene Munster, senior research analyst for Piper Jaffray, believes that if Apple were to release a television it could add $2.5 billion in revenue in 2012, $4 bilion in 2013 and $6 billion in 2014.

Munster believes that with the recent announcement of iCloud and recent television related patents, Apple is positioning itself for an announcement.

“At first the only media iCloud will store is music and pictures, but we believe Apple may add movies and TV shows purchased or rented in iTunes to the iCloud service, which could be viewed on a TV,” said Munster in a note to clients.

The biggest differentiator for Apple would be the App Store, according to Munster. With a strong line-up of developers, Apple has the foundation to make an Apple television a success.

“We believe Apple’s next step towards a television will be to open an App Store on the Apple TV; the company has already added apps like YouTube, Netflix and MLB to the platform,” said Munster. “We believe Apple may open the Apple TV up to 3rd party developers and launch an Apple TV App Store within the next year. The final step would be bringing the Apple TV software and the App Store to an Apple Television.”



  • http://twitter.com/mikeeyes Michael Marino

    I don’t see what benefit an Apple-branded television has over plugging in an Apple TV to an existing television. I know Munster has been beating this drum for a long time, but I still don’t see the advantages.

    • His Shadow

      You are not wrong. Apple got out of printers and standalone cameras for this exact reason. The iPad (currently) and the iPhone (initially) had no competition. They redefined old or defined new markets. The thing that Apple could bring to televisions is what they are already doing, and it’s called the Apple TV.

  • Anonymous

    Industry analysts are always right. Especially Munster. This will definitely happen.

    • Anonymous

      Munster is one of the analysts known as the Idiot Three. Shaw Wu is another of the three (I forgot the other one, just recall that it is a woman). They constantly talk out of their asses when it comes to tech, particularly Apple and they are 99.9% always wrong. 

  • http://www.theangrydrunk.com The Angry Drunk

    Oh my God, Gene is right! How could I have been a fool all this time. It never occurred to me that Apple could make money by selling television sets.

    This opens up a whole new realm of possibilities for Apple. Think of all the money they’re leaving on the table by not selling cars, or boats, or designer jeans, or toasters. I mean FUCK, why doesn’t Apple get into every market. I mean it’s FUCKING APPLE!! Fanboy losers will just flock to any old crap that they slap a logo on.

    fucktards

    • Anonymous

      I heard about that toaster thing. This guy I know told me – just before he passed out from hitting on a bong – that he heard that someone else had read some headers in that new iOS 5 seed thing (who knew you could grow software from a seed !!?!??) and those headers, they definitely include new functions for toast related operations.  I mean ‘pop’ right ? What could that be if it ISN’T toast, right ?

      But this other guy I know who sleeps on a bench with a bottle of Jack, he said that they had to leave it out of this release because it burns the toast (burns ? Or is it just Steve Job’s DRACONIAN CONTROL of my toast preferences ???!!!??), so Apple are covering it up.

      It’s FUCKING TOASTGATE MAN!

      Anyway, I hear that pre orders on this thing are through the roof!

      • http://www.theuniversalsteve.com Anonymous

        “I mean ‘pop’ right ? What could that be if it ISN’T toast, right ?”

        It could be tarts.

        • http://mangochut.net/ mangochutney

          OMG guise! I think you’re onto something.

          It seems to me that all of this is a coded message. I mean look at the clues: Toast, no toast, pop, not pop, toast, tarts, pop, toast, no toast, pop, tarts, POP TARTS!

          OMG this means there will be a unifying OS release for Mac, iPhone and iPad. THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE:

          OS NYAN CAT

  • Dot

    I really don’t see why Apple would enter such a notoriously low profit area.

  • http://twitter.com/Moeskido Moeskido

    Analysts like Munster repeat shit like this every year, hoping it’ll make them sound intelligent.

  • Anonymous

    the key to making this kind of thing work is the content. Things like getting HBO, Showtime etc to release their stuff same day/day after and not six months later. Getting folks like Starz on board, same gig. Better pricing on tv eps, especially rentals, perhaps even a subscription plan (using the rental files so you can download and watch offline). Getting others to follow the game of the NBA and MLB and have sports streaming apps for “live” viewing. Getting places like HBO to allow for direct subscriptions via their apps so we aren’t paying a cable company $60-70 for things we might not watch for the privilege of paying another $20 each for the 2-3 that we do want. Breaking the Nielsen stranglehold on defining quality so such things will count in a show’s budget make good so the nets won’t be so scared of jumping in. And most of all, a viable blu-ray quality download file and yes, crazy as it might sound, more of the pre-release and just out of the theatre movies (even if they are $20 a rental). 

    All of which are things that Apple can do with their little black box and leave the issues of licensing, law suits about not allowing all tv companies access to their tech etc behind. Customers won’t be griping about how they can only get the Apple TV with Sony tech but they would rather have Samsung, staff would be having to deal with the complaints, etc. It’s a win win all around if Apple doesn’t make a tv.

    • http://www.informationworkshop.org Mark Hernandez

      Totally correct.  And along with “content” is “electronic interface” which is how consumers will expect the Apple Television to interface with their audio equipment, TiVo, PS3, Xbox, and cable and satellite boxes, etc

      If Apple is going to accept cable input, (how many people would buy it if it didn’t) then they must either control cable boxes with infrared, accept CableCARDS (installed and configured by the cable companies) or deal with the new AllVid standard coming up. Don’t even ask about accessing proprietary on-demand content.

      Finally, people would be disappointed if Apple’s interface did not also control their TiVo and cable and satellite boxes and sound system with a single remote or control interface (which in many setups, like mine, the sound system switches the video source to peel off the Dolby/DTS, not the TV).

      It’s complicated.  It’s a mess.  And it defies being tamed by ANYONE, especially when competitors will quickly throw a wrench in your works!

      This rumor needs to die.  It’s great for pageviews, though, eh?

  • http://twitter.com/feralchimp feralchimp

    Revenue is not profit.

  • http://www.theangrydrunk.com The Angry Drunk

    I do love how Gene always uses the royal “we”. As if this crap comes from anywhere other than his febrile imagination.

    • His Shadow

      With skin bacteria and intestinal fauna, no one is ever alone.

  • http://www.bynkii.com/ John C. Welch

    Exactly what features doesn’t apple have now with the AppleTV that an actual screen would give them?

    • Anonymous

      It would give Steve Jobs ONE BEEEELION DOLLARS! (Why is there no fucking emoticon for ‘Dr Evil pinky gesture’ ?)

  • John W Baxter

    Revenue, perhaps. Profit?

  • http://mangochut.net/ mangochutney

    Oh.My.God. That stupid TV rumour again.

    Why in all the world would Apple what to build something like this? I won’t reiterate what other’s have said already, but this is just stupid.

    Munster is just clueless.

  • Dylan

    TV manufacturers may not get great margins. However has it occurred to anyone that because Apple owns a significant retail channel that they wouldn’t suffer the same fate (ie the Apple Store)? If Apple could capture the markup that Best Buy regularly employs for TVs I bet Apple could make a pretty penny.

    Apple could make a TV that has only one HDMI port, one standard size screen and the appleTV components. It would make tons of people scream that it’s not functional enough — a giant iPad. But I bet that that would be cheaper for Apple to make them than your typical TV and Apple wouldn’t have to charge a “premium” since it would already capture Best Buy’s typical markup.

    • http://www.theangrydrunk.com The Angry Drunk

      Apple is not, in fact, run by magical unicorns. The TV you’re describing would fail so miserably in the market that it would make the CrunchPad seem like a brilliant idea.

      • Dylan

        It’ll fail miserably like the iPad right? I think eventually Apple will make the ballsy bet that for most people all they really need is iTunes, airplay and one hdmi input to connect to your cable tv set top box.

  • Anonymous

    As others have noted I don’t see an Apple television making any sense. The Apple TV set-top device covers the distinctive facets of such a content delivery system, allowing the user to mate Apple TV to any size or type of TV they want. Also, while Apple would tack on it’s typical price markup, flat panel TVs are so cheap now that they’d STILL be starting at a pretty low market value for a TV, making it challenging to jack up the price of their TV to the margins they typically enjoy. In the end the profit margin just may not be worth it … although, the more Apple Televisions out there equals more people buying into the Apple ecosystem (or walled garden) which DOES make profit for Apple.

    The key — again, as others have noted — is Apple succeeding in getting a viable and diverse array of content available at a reasonable price… but this comes down to how progressive the content creators, distributors, broadcasters and performing rights organizations will be in agreeing to royalties; and they rarely are. I always chuckle when people say, “I want APPLE to have more content” when, in reality, the content OWNERS I listed above are the gatekeepers of the content. It’s all up to them, not Apple.

    Eventually, online distribution will be the only way we will receive content… eventually. But when will the critical mass of content becomes available fr it all to make sense? Who knows?

    One thing not brought up about all of this is data costs. As we move more towards online distribution to both fixed and mobile devices, 3G, 4G (and whatever in the future) along with cable/DSL/satellite, ISPs will face unbelievably heavier and heavier traffic — and ALL of that is becoming metered if not metered already. We will have to factor that cost into our content consumption lifestyle as well!

  • Roby

    I’d buy one in a heartbeat.

    Plus, Apple should buy Netflix along with putting this out–and seed a bunch of independent movie and TV show writers and producers.  It would be an end run around the networks, independent of the mindless, ad supported nonsense out there.

  • Rain Skipper

    I hereby predict Gene Munster’s Apple prediction in 2025 – “Apple will be soon release a new HDTV with iOS built in. Blah, blah, blah”