Comments on Andrea Chalupa's articles RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.com/author/andrea-chalupa/articles http://seekingalpha.com/article/98543-big-tech-prepares-for-big-layoffs?source=feed#comment-334408 334408 Fri, 19 Dec 2008 23:13:38 -0500 www.layoffs.in Hope 2009 is a bright year.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/100566-apple-s-itunes-chump-change-for-hollywood?source=feed#comment-289239 289239 Thu, 23 Oct 2008 21:01:51 -0400 Prior to joining Condé Nast Portfolio, Andrea was a news reporter for The Portland Mercury in Oregon. She was a 2007 finalist for the Sundance Screenwriters Lab.

Andrea graduated with a B.A. in Soviet history from the University of California Davis and attended the Harvard Ukrainian Institute.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/100566-apple-s-itunes-chump-change-for-hollywood?source=feed#comment-286172 286172 Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:06:28 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/100566-apple-s-itunes-chump-change-for-hollywood?source=feed#comment-286012 286012 Mon, 20 Oct 2008 00:19:05 -0400
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/100566-apple-s-itunes-chump-change-for-hollywood?source=feed#comment-285963 285963 Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:14:35 -0400
GM should pay a tax to Exxon. I would never buy a car if Exxon didn't have that great Exxon stuff to put inside it. Nice try Zucker.

Outside of Thursday night I don't think I could name an NBC show. Oh wait, Law & Order. But that's it.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/100566-apple-s-itunes-chump-change-for-hollywood?source=feed#comment-285944 285944 Sun, 19 Oct 2008 21:21:01 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/100566-apple-s-itunes-chump-change-for-hollywood?source=feed#comment-285910 285910 Sun, 19 Oct 2008 19:49:00 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/100566-apple-s-itunes-chump-change-for-hollywood?source=feed#comment-285713 285713 Sun, 19 Oct 2008 13:24:50 -0400
Hollywood is laughing like the music industry did - only to find iTunes as the number 1 retailer of their product. models created in the fifties have been lucky to survive as long as they have.

Like Chano said, people can pick and choose now. There's so much media on the internet that's more interesting than what hollywood and the networks have to offer. I've dropped my DirecTV as they tried to make me pay for dozens of channels I didn't want with their inflexible packages. Instead of the extra fifteen bucks they tried to gouge out of me they now get zero Murphy dollars.

I save a lot of money by buying only the content I want to watch.

Chano was right about blu-ray too: for tons of consumers, even those interested in entertainment tech, video disc formats are on the wrong side of a diminishing returns curve. the improvement in picture quality just isn't enough to make people pay so much more. blu-ray for the set-top box doesn't entice me at all, I'm more than satisfied with dvd quality. Others crave higher and higher resolution - no argument there, but at today's price points MANY will ignore blu-ray.

Zucker holding his job through all this only highlights the disarray of the networks. Look for him starring on a reality show some day soon.

]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/100566-apple-s-itunes-chump-change-for-hollywood?source=feed#comment-285705 285705 Sun, 19 Oct 2008 13:11:32 -0400
By the same logic, NBC, for example, shouldn't bother selling ads on a college bowl game, as that is just "chump change" compared to GE's market cap.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/100566-apple-s-itunes-chump-change-for-hollywood?source=feed#comment-285556 285556 Sun, 19 Oct 2008 09:14:05 -0400 The point is, people have wised up and they don't want packaged media, they want to pick and mix what they watch, read and listen to. This is wonderful news for us ordinary folks whose money keeps all biz ticking over. It is a death knell for all media 'publicasters' who think that their exploitative business model will survive. When, as is already happening, TV, radio, mags and papers see their revenues tank, albeit slowly to begin with, they will holler and wail and rail at Apple and iTMS because life is just so unfair, boo hoo. Fools like Jeff Zucker, (now what does that rhyme with in his case?) who are still reeling drunk on the excesses of their old biz model, suddenly find that they have lost control and the damn consumers have somehow stopped being their doormat and taken charge of how they watch, listen and read. Only a truly desperate dolt like Zucker would suggest that Apple should pay NBC a royalty on every iPod sold. Why? Where does that entitlement come from? Apple is doing them and all the studios and all the record companies a huge favour by slightly extending their failing biz model. The point that they, and you, are missing is that any revenue they make from iTMS is a pure opportunity value. It came from Apple's innovations - they needed to make very little effort to achieve those added, windfall, profits. All they needed to do really was simply to sign wherever Steve Jobs told them to sign and then disappear and let Apple do what they themselves (i.e. the Zuckerati) never ever imagined could be done to generate sales with no traditional pressing, printing, sales and negligible distribution costs. Beautiful really. But these greedy (Z)uckers are never satisfied and for the usual 30 pieces of dollar, they can find talentless shills like you to do their pathetic bleating for them. You should be ashamed. Really.
GE's market cap is an irrelevance. Market cap can evaporate overnight as many many companies are realising this month - GE and Apple included. These royalties are a windfall bonus to NBC and others, whose traditional channels of distribution, and profit models, are failing fast. Seen in this light, these revenues from Apple are a Godsend, an air supply to a drowning ingrate. You should know this and avoid making such a comprehensive fool of yourself, Portfolio.com and Conde Nast.
Compare these royalties as additions to GE's net revenues and then let us hear what you have to say. If you want to know the difference between market cap and revenues, I will be happy to enlighten you but, in the meantime, why not write for a column on comparison grocery shopping or similar. It's much safer ground for your skill level and you may have something useful to say.
I stand by what I said elsewhere, in another post against your shill nonsense:
Your article is chump change in the world of journalism. Ad revenues are going to rapidly decline as broadcast tv loses its relevance to a world that is moving on to user-driven tv. In the future , the insidious cancer of advertising will be beaten down to acceptable, non-intrusive levels as users realise what a distraction it is from a program's entertainment value; how much it adds to the cost of everything they buy and how it pollutes the airwaves with noise. I fully expect that as TV and all news media gravitate to the web, software will become available to filter out the ads. I would pay up to $500 and $50 in annual subs and updates to buy such software if it was available. So, when you factor out the rapid decline of tv ad revenues and factor in the rapid growth in sales of anything that sells on iTunes, your views will change, you chump.
Your article is entirely untrue in terms of biz model trends and so it is worthless. Find me any CEO anywhere on the planet who would say no to hundreds of millions in added revenue with no additional effort. then I might listen to you. Which planet are you on btw?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/100566-apple-s-itunes-chump-change-for-hollywood?source=feed#comment-285545 285545 Sun, 19 Oct 2008 08:46:27 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/100566-apple-s-itunes-chump-change-for-hollywood?source=feed#comment-285496 285496 Sun, 19 Oct 2008 06:01:38 -0400
Andrea,

Can you fill us in on how Apple revenues compare to competing download or streaming generated revenues?

These competitive numbers would be very interesting to consider.

Thanks.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/98543-big-tech-prepares-for-big-layoffs?source=feed#comment-276169 276169 Tue, 07 Oct 2008 16:56:18 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/98543-big-tech-prepares-for-big-layoffs?source=feed#comment-274950 274950 Mon, 06 Oct 2008 14:49:53 -0400